For categories of information that are central to a thriving public life, copyright protection is泭 inherently inappropriate as a default legal status. Access to such information undergirds both discourse and practice in areas such as:
-
Provision of justice and legal representation;泭
-
Due process and equal protection of law;
-
Technological interoperability, consumer choice, and risks of corporate concentration;
-
Innovation, scientific research, and informed consent;
-
Cultural education and creativity.
We will explore categories of ideas and information serves such a vital social purpose that legal restraints on public access are counterproductive. 泭 Instead, these are the essential building blocks that should form part of a broadly conceived public domain, connected, but not limited to, works whose term has expired and those placed in the public domain by statute.
[C]opyright assures authors the right to their original泭 [*350] expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work米 This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate. It is the means by which copyright advances the progress of science and art.
Feist Publ'ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340, 349-350 (1991)