User:Klueska/hovtaflove
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ho v. Taflove was a case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit that tested the laws concerning the copyrightability of ideas vs. the expression of those ideas (the so-called idea-expression divide)[1]. This case was first decided in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on January 15, 2010[2], with that judgement affirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals on June 6, 2011[3].
![]() | This is the user sandbox of Klueska. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here. Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review! |
Ho v. Taflove | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit |
Decided | June 6, 2011 |
Citations | Ho v. Taflove (7th Cir. June 6, 2011), Text. |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Kenneth F. Ripple and David F. Hamilton, Circuit Judges, and G. Patrick Murphy, District Judge (opinion signed by judge Elaine E. Bucklo) |
Case opinions | |
Summary judgment in favor of the defendants |
The plaintiffs in this case alleged that the defendants violated the Copyright Act by publishing equations, figures, and text from research materials originally produced by the plaintiffs. The court granted summary judgement in favor of the defendants, concluding that the plaintiff's research materials were unprotectable ideas under copyright law's merger doctrine, and thus no wrong doing was performed by the defendants when publishing a paper based on those materials.