Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { ?s ?p "See v. Durang (1983) was a case where the author of a play claimed that another playwright had based a second play on a draft script that the plaintiff had written, infringing on its copyright. The court refused to consider the process by which the second play had been created, but chose to simply compare the end results. The court found no infringement, coining the axiom, \"Copying deleted or so disguised as to be unrecognizable is not copying.\""@en }
Showing triples 1 to 2 of
2
with 100 triples per page.
- See_v._Durang abstract "See v. Durang (1983) was a case where the author of a play claimed that another playwright had based a second play on a draft script that the plaintiff had written, infringing on its copyright. The court refused to consider the process by which the second play had been created, but chose to simply compare the end results. The court found no infringement, coining the axiom, \"Copying deleted or so disguised as to be unrecognizable is not copying.\"".
- See_v._Durang comment "See v. Durang (1983) was a case where the author of a play claimed that another playwright had based a second play on a draft script that the plaintiff had written, infringing on its copyright. The court refused to consider the process by which the second play had been created, but chose to simply compare the end results. The court found no infringement, coining the axiom, \"Copying deleted or so disguised as to be unrecognizable is not copying.\"".