Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991)

“Sweat of the brow is not enough; originality is required for copyright.”

Short Description:

The Supreme Court ruled that compilations of facts do not automatically receive copyright protection. Copyright requires originality in selection, arrangement, or presentation.

Facts:

⦁ Rural Telephone Service published a telephone directory.

⦁ Feist Publications copied names, addresses, and numbers without permission.

⦁ Rural sued for copyright infringement.

⦁ Lower courts debated whether “sweat of the brow” (effort alone) creates copyright.

Findings / Reasoning:

⦁ Facts are not copyrightable.

⦁ Copyright protects the creative selection, coordination, or arrangement of facts, not effort alone.

⦁ The Court emphasized that originality is the key requirement.

Suggestions / Implications:

⦁ Compiling public information does not automatically grant copyright.

⦁ Encourages creative contribution rather than mere effort.

⦁ Set a precedent for databases, directories, and compilations.

Judgment & Date:

⦁ Judgment: In favor of Feist; Rural’s compilation lacked originality.

⦁ Date: May 27, 1991.