[digital-copyright] Please check my thinking

["Colson, Jeannie" <jcolson@xxxxxxx>]

We have a drafting instructor who's preparing to publish a custom textbook.
Yes, publish (I say this because we're not talking about reserves or handouts;
bigger implications.).

He has created a technical drawing (think blueprint-type drawing) of an
electrical trip box for the text book. The original drawing came from another
textbook, though he has changed it in a few ways: He's added "cutouts" on all
three views, he's entered the dimensions (the original drawing had "blanks"
for students to identify, so the original was an exercise in figuring
dimensions, I believe. The new one is a starting point for creating a
orthographic drawing, as I understand it.).

Here's my thinking:
The drawing (whether original or the edited one by my faculty member) is
"factual," that is, it simply reproduces the factual information about the
physical object. It is something that anybody with the right background and
the core information could create. It's reporting what is, not creating
something. He could easily edit the dimensions to create another of the same
type, but it's not like the drawing he's used as his starting point is
original. So, I'm thinking that his changes are probably enough to make the
case that he's not using someone else's intellectual property.

Am I on track? I have other thoughts, but I'm thinking that this particular
piece is enough. Is it?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeannie Colson
Campus Copyright Advisor/Dist. Ed. Librarian
PO Box 818
Lee College
Baytown, TX 77522-0818
jcolson@xxxxxxx
281-425-6497