Document Type
Article
Publication Date
Summer 2012
Keywords
Copyright, Ratings, Rankings
Disciplines
Intellectual Property Law
Abstract
Are ratings copyrightable? The answer depends on what ratings are. As a history of copyright in ratings shows, some courts treat them as unoriginal facts, some treat them as creative opinions, and some treat them as troubling self-fulfilling prophecies. The push and pull among these three theories explains why ratings are such a difficult boundary case for copyright, both doctrinally and theoretically. The fact-opinion tension creates a perverse incentive for raters: the less useful a rating, the more copyrightable it looks. Self-fulfilling ratings are the most troubling of all: copyright’s usual balance between incentives and access becomes indeterminate when ratings shape reality, rather than vice versa. All three theories are necessary for a complete understanding of ratings.
Recommended Citation
James Grimmelmann, "Three Theories of Copyright in Ratings," 14 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 851 (2012)
Comments
This article predates the author's affiliation with Cornell Law School.