Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Hotel Being Sued for Using the Dewey Decimal System

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Sep 21, 2003 10:38 AM
from the who-knew dept.
cbull writes "Did you know the Dewey Decimal System isn't in the public domain? The rights are owned by the Online Computer Library Center. They are suing the Library Hotel in New York for trademark infringement. In addition, according to the article, libraries pay at least $500/year to use the system."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • well damn! by flyneye (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:39AM
    • Re:well damn! by Wooky_linuxer (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:41AM
    • Interesting idea by soccerisgod (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:45AM
    • Re:well damn! by Frobnicator (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @06:12PM
      • Re:well damn! by Dashing Leech (Score:3) Sunday September 21 2003, @06:41PM
        • Re:well damn! by Frobnicator (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @06:44PM
      • Re:well damn! by flyneye (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:12PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:well damn! by Illbay (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @09:28PM
      • Re:well damn! by donbrock (Score:1) Monday September 22 2003, @07:48PM
  • This could be good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ryosen (234440) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:40AM (#7017690)
    Just one more reason to do away with an antiquated filing system.
    • Re:This could be good (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ahfoo (223186) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:57AM (#7017813)
      (Last Journal: Friday April 04 2003, @12:49AM)
      No doubt. The DDC is such a pain in the ass when you're used to LOC. I am also suprised to find tht it's still being licensed. I thought the only people still using it were in countries that didn't want to submit to LOC guidelines because their own copyright laws were uhm, different.
      I know that's the case here in Taiwan. I was shocked to find major research universities using DDC and then when I began working with a publisher I learned that it had a lot to do with copyright and the LOC. In fact, I taught classes on using the LOC at one point for students preparing to go overseas.
      But personally I find the DDC obnoxious and far more of an obstacle to research than a helpful classification system.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:This could be good by Ed Avis (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:03AM
        • Re:This could be good (Score:5, Interesting)

          by ahfoo (223186) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:32AM (#7018024)
          (Last Journal: Friday April 04 2003, @12:49AM)
          It's simple really. You're not supposed to just make up LOC numbers for you local archive out of thin air. If you've got a new title, you have to submit your title to the LOC. But if your book is largely a collection of "borrowed" material being reprinted without authorization, that's obviously not going to be your first choice.
          Things really have changed with the IP nazis on everybody's ass these days, but once upon a time there was a large market in reprinting expensive foreign titles and even making custom bound compilations. See the problem? Where are you going to file that?
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:This could be good (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:09AM (#7017886)
        Both Dewey and Library of Congress are "divide and conquer" stratergies - that is, you split the search space into smaller and smaller chunks until you find what you're looking for.

        This is an acceptable solution when you're searching on paper or your search sapce isn't that large, but today we have computers and far more data.

        For example, "Algorithms in C" is a classic text a lot of people here probably own.

        But does it belong under "math", "computer science", or "computer languages -> C"? (Dewey seperates Computing out into a seperate category, rather than placing it under math).

        The answer, of course, is all three.

        The ideal system would be a free-text search of all the books in the catalogue. But until we can do that, keywords and searchable abstracts are more useful than categories. Just put the damn books on the shelf in order of author.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:This could be good (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Jeremy Erwin (2054) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:28AM (#7017998)
          (Last Journal: Monday March 28 2005, @11:39AM)
          Libraries are already strapped for cash--until an automated book retrieval system is developed, then the only way to fully implement your system would be to insert three copies into the stacks.

          Sometimes, libraries do place faux books on the shelf with instructions to the browser to "also consult this CDROM" but stacks loaded with these faux books would not be particularly easy to browse.

          My ideal library would let browsers borrow hand held electronic catalogues-- so that flashes of insight wouldn't need to be followed by a long trek back to the catalogs in the lobby.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:This could be good (Score:5, Interesting)

          by orthogonal (588627) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:32AM (#7018032)
          (Last Journal: Sunday April 16 2006, @10:03PM)
          The ideal system would be a free-text search of all the books in the catalogue.

          You make a very good point that a hierarchical system isn't suitable for cataloging. I have the same problem with my more than 6000 (all legally acquired) MP3s: Artists span Genres, Albums contain works by more than one Composer, Artists may appear in more than one Group/Band/Orchestra, etc.

          But free-text search isn't a great solution; we've all seen that with Google: I can find web pages about Apple MacIntosh and I can find pages about growing Apple MacIntoshes, but it's hard to separate the pages about computers from those about cookery.

          In these cases, an abstract is more useful than a full-text search.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:This could be good (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Zoop (59907) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:50AM (#7018169)
          The ideal system would be a free-text search of all the books in the catalogue.

          No, no, no, no.

          What is needed is that PLUS exactly what you hinted at: faceted classification.

          Books can be arranged on the shelves by author or FILO or whatever, but they should be, in the age of computers, indexed by multiple heirarchical facets.

          Keywords and free-text searches are far too unreliable, even in the age of Google. If you're doing serious research, you can't rely on the first Google hit, you need to try several different methods. In fact, Google's methodology, ranking by weighted hyperlink popularity, wouldn't apply to books.

          What you need are a combination of faceted classification (like the subject entries in the cataloging software most libraries use) and free-text as well as abstract searching. Quite frankly, humans and the software they write are too stupid to classify everything well enough to use one system or another exclusively.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:This could be good by harlows_monkeys (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:58AM
        • Re:This could be good by gnalle (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:05PM
          • Re:This could be good (Score:4, Informative)

            by kotj.mf (645325) on Sunday September 21 2003, @01:26PM (#7018861)
            The ideal system would be a free-text search of all the books in the catalogue. But until we can do that, keywords and searchable abstracts are more useful than categories. Just put the damn books on the shelf in order of author.

            I worked as a reference assistant at a large urban public library for 5+ years, and in my experience, less than half of the people who came in were doing research via the catalog. Most of them were simply browsing by subject. 99% of the time, it was faster and easier to simply point them to the spot on the shelves where a particular subject number was.

            I mean, we were five floors covering an entire city block... would you really want to have to walk from one extreme of the building to grab Linux Apache Web Server Administration by Charles Aulds to the other end to get Matt Welsh's Running Linux? In my library, I could just point to to a single shelf with the 005's.

            Shelving by author is fine, barely, for fiction, where a lot people tend to read every book by a particular author. Even then, a lot of large libraries tend to split stuff up by genre much like your local bookstore. But for nonfiction, organizing by subject for browsing and casual research is the only way to go.

            As for Dewey vs. LC, well, that's up there with vi and Emacs. LC works well for academic libraries where there's a hell of a lot more in-depth research going on, while Dewey works best for public libraries. I find Dewey more intuitive, but that's probably because I know it best. In research institutions, where most patrons have the time to spend a half hour in front of a catalog session, LC seems to fit the bill. YMMV, natch.

            [ Parent ]
        • Re:This could be good by JeffTL (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:19PM
        • Re:This could be good by DavidBrown (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:34PM
        • Re:This could be good by 1u3hr (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:39PM
        • Re:This could be good by Skuld-Chan (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @02:08PM
        • Browsing by Dissonant (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:17PM
        • Re:This could be good by refactored (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:23PM
        • Re:This could be good by RAMMS+EIN (Score:3) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:40PM
        • Re:This could be good by shirai (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @07:20PM
        • Re:This could be good by MidnightBrewer (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:56PM
        • Re:Or it could be worse by bickerdyke (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @05:21PM
        • Re:Or it could be worse by mpe (Score:2) Monday September 22 2003, @03:38AM
        • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:This could be good by TWX (Score:3) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:12AM
      • Re:This could be good by Reziac (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:45PM
      • Re:This could be good by frisket (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:13PM
      • Re:This could be good by dvdeug (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @07:17PM
      • mod parent down as flamebait surely! by fantomas (Score:2) Monday September 22 2003, @06:21AM
      • Re:This could be good by dltallan (Score:1) Monday September 22 2003, @09:03AM
    • Re:This could be good by D'Sphitz (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:27AM
    • Re:This could be good by macdaddy357 (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:49AM
    • Re:This could be good (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Scooter (8281) <owen@@@annicnova...force9...net> on Sunday September 21 2003, @04:20PM (#7019831)
      I couldn't agree more - I mean come on guys - you can't copyright/patent counting. I don't claim to be an expert on the DD indexing "system" but I just read the "introduction" pdf and it seems to me to be a simple hierachical identifier, a lot like er.. IP addressing... And in what way is it "decimal" anyway? because it has "."'s between the numbers?!? Give it up guys. Here's Scooters semi-colon numbering system: you define a whole bunch of top level categories, and then some sub categories, and then some sub-sub-categories, and when you get bored of adding tiers, number the books. Write them down as a;b;c;d;....n. Great - now if any of you tea leafs start numbering things like that - I'll see you in court! :P

      I mean in this day and age surely some sort of tree structure would be better (and be easier to manipulate by machines). Each book has n number of attributes where n is bigger than 0. You can go on adding nodes of type attribute until the book is described uniqely. Or dammit - just index them by the ISBN and chuck in a whole bunch of keywords to search by..

      In other news, the estate of one Pythagoras is suing everyone for making the square of the hypotenuse on their triangles equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides - the thieving swines! Pop-Idol on BBC2 next, after the weather.

      [ Parent ]
    • OS Hex Filing System by chiasmus1 (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:16PM
    • Re:Alternatives? by oscitant (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:12AM
    • Assign Object IDentifiers to the categories by Moderation abuser (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:38AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Fees for this? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Martin Blank (154261) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:40AM (#7017691)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday November 26 2002, @07:28PM)
    Next thing you know, someone's going to start charging for Linux.

    Oh, wait...
  • nice quote inside the article by selderrr (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:41AM
  • 340 (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:41AM (#7017707)
    Dewey Decimal for Law books. They're gonna need it.
    • PORN! by Malfourmed (Score:3) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:59PM
    • 1337 by ma++i+ude (Score:1) Monday September 22 2003, @08:40AM
  • Out of business (Score:5, Insightful)

    by larien (5608) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:43AM (#7017719)
    (http://riddoch.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday March 01 2003, @10:55AM)
    We're not interested in putting the hotel out of business.
    Er, so why are you suing for "triple the hotel's profits since its opening or triple the organization's damages, whichever is greater"? Yes, they're willing to settle, but to be honest, the first line should have been a lawyer's letter, not filing a complaint. I can only assume that the lawyers can charge more for filing a complaint so they advised them to file rather than discuss.
    • or maybe... by Karma Sucks (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:55AM
    • Re:Out of business (Score:5, Informative)

      by signe (64498) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:03AM (#7017850)
      (http://bonkoif.com/)
      Read the article first, please.

      The lawsuit said the center sent three letters to Kallan from October 2000 to October 2002, asking for acknowledgment of Online's ownership of the Dewey trademarks, but the hotel owner didn't respond.

      While I agree the hotel should pay the back licensing fees, I think this lawsuit is a little excessive. But given that they said letters were sent, it's probably just to get the hotel's attention. The OCLC even says at the bottom of the article that they're looking to settle, and they don't want the hotel to go out of business. They just want a licensing agreement.

      I've been to the Library Hotel. It's a really nice place. Yes, the books play an integral part in the ambiance of the hotel. But the use of the Dewey Decimal System is hardly the biggest thing they've got going for them, or the most important. They could easily drop the DDC classifications of the floors and rooms and the hotel would lose nothing by it.

      -Todd
      [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Open source, anyone? by dostalgic (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM
  • School library (Score:5, Informative)

    by Leffe (686621) <leffe@NOspAM.users.sourceforge.net> on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM (#7017727)
    (http://nullref.se/)
    Hmm... from what I've found out about DDC, it seems like my school library uses it.

    I really doubt they have a license. And there's no way to find out until tuesday... I can't wait!

    Oh, and here's a nice intro on DDC:

    http://www.oclc.org/dewey/versions/ddc22print/intr o.pdf [oclc.org]
    (Why is there a space between the 'r' and 'o'?)
  • Connections (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mopslik (688435) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM (#7017730)

    From the article:

    "A person who came to their Web site and looked at the way (the hotel) is promoted and marketed would think they were passing themselves off as connected with the owner of the Dewey Decimal Classification system."

    Don't you think that a person browsing the website might just think "Oh, they're a theme hotel"?

    On the other hand, if libraries have to license it, then I guess that's how it works.

  • Trademarked? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PipianJ (574459) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM (#7017732)
    How can you trademark the Dewey Decimal System? Sounds more like a patentable system to me... So how did it get filed under the trademark category? (Nice to know they've registered it under the one class of IP which never expires as long as you pay. I mean, look, it says it was created in 1873!)
    • Re:Trademarked? by squiggleslash (Score:3) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:56AM
    • Re:Trademarked? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GnrcMan (53534) * on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:57AM (#7017815)
      (http://www.kckd.org/)
      I think they trademarked the term "Dewey Decimal System". The objection isn't to the use of the system itself (even if it was patented, I doubt the patent would extend to hotel room clasification) it's that the website uses the term (or trademark) Dewey Decimal System all over it.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Trademarked? by YouHaveSnail (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:44PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Trademarked? by BabyDave (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:59AM
    • Re:Trademarked? by 91degrees (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:02AM
  • What's this part supposed to mean? by Zakabog (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Question by Hinkkanen (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:44AM
    • Re:Question by Nevo (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:46AM
    • Re:Question by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:15AM
    • Re:Question by inode_buddha (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:38AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Happy Birthday by careysb (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:46AM
    • Re:Happy Birthday by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:09AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • What have (Score:4, Funny)

    by Timesprout (579035) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:48AM (#7017755)
    Hewey and Lewey got to say about this ?
    • Re:What have by Sunnan (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:34PM
    • Re:What have by Savatte (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @02:50PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Perhaps this is why. by ggroth (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:48AM
  • Next thing... by VEGx (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:48AM
  • Only one solution ... by BabyDave (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:48AM
  • hah (Score:4, Funny)

    by yoshi1013 (674815) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:50AM (#7017765)
    (http://www.kickinthehead.org/)
    "Excuse me, where can I find a book on astronomy?"

    "Don't you know the Dewey Decimal System????"

    CONAN THE LIBRARIAN!

    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • LoC Classification (Score:3, Interesting)

    by EngrBohn (5364) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:51AM (#7017774)
    They really should use The Library of Congress' Classification [loc.gov] -- it's currently in use by (most?) libraries, and no one owns a trademark on it!
  • I don't get it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Hortensia Patel (101296) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:51AM (#7017776)
    What "rights" are they talking about here? That is, what sort of IP is being licensed?

    Patents would make a sort of sense, but Dewy Decimal dates back to 1873, so it can't be a patent. Copyright doesn't seem to apply since there isn't obviously a "work" being copied.

    What gives? Is it just a matter of the trademark?
  • How is this even possible? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tbase (666607) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:51AM (#7017777)
    According to this page, Melvil Dewey (1851-1931) anonymously published the system in 1876.

    On the other hand, it seems that the Online Compyter Library Center does do quite a bit of work to maintain the system, which should entitle them to some rights - but it sure seems that if some guy published something anonymously in 1876, he probably intended it to be in the public domain. Seems to me, if the hotel was based on the original system, and not the one improved by subsequent owners, he should be ok - especially if they referred to it as the "Melvil Dewey System" or something.

    I had no idea it was owned - how come they aren't going after the elementary schools that teach the system? Or is that included in their library's license? And how come we're teaching a proprietary, trademarked system? Next thing you know, they'll be teaching our kids Windows!!!
  • Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rde (17364) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:51AM (#7017780)
    "A person who came to their Web site and looked at the way (the hotel) is promoted and marketed would think they were passing themselves off as connected with the owner of the Dewey Decimal Classification system."

    Yeah, right. If I was particularly jetlagged, drunk or whatever, I might pop up to the counter and ask to speak to Melvil Dewey. But I'm sure I'm not alone in that I never even considered that a numeric system invented in the next-to-previous century would still be owned today, much less that anyone who used it would be representative of that owner.

    It's lucky that I'm ambivalent about my primary school; when I was there, I organised the books according to the Dewey system. If I were at all bitter, I'd rat them out, and not just becuase the 098 section was completely empty.

    Oh, and here's something funny. In my research for this comment, I typed 'dewey 098' into google to see if it still meant what I thought it did.
    098 is for forbidden books. Now that you know that google for 'dewey 098' while you're feeling lucky.
    • Re:Bullshit by Night Goat (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:55PM
      • Re:Bullshit by rde (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @02:07PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Created in 1873? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MunchMunch (670504) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:52AM (#7017783)
    (http://doyoulovepuppiesido.blogspot.com/)
    Now hold on--The article itself states that "Melvil Dewey created the most widely used library classification system in 1873."

    Anything from before the 1920s should be in the public domain, even if nothing after that will ever go into the public domain. I mean, was there indeed some perpetual copyright clause slipped into some bill or another? How could anybody otherwise still own the rights to this?

  • How is this NOT public domain? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by JayBlalock (635935) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:53AM (#7017789)
    I'm not being some sort of commu-terrorist, I'm trying to figure this out. The Dewey system was invented in the 1870s. It's something around 130 years old. How can it POSSIBLY still have its rights tied up? I thought until around 1930 our Congress was still rational enough to see that having things going to the Public Domain was a good thing.
  • library hotel (Score:4, Funny)

    by ibmman85 (643041) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:53AM (#7017790)
    (http://www.fivefeetdeep.com/)
    i like the erotica package detailed on their site.. sounds pretty good.. i dont think my girlfriend's parents would too much approve of us utilizing such facilities though and it probably costs more than the $2 that belongs to me. college. blah.
  • Why not use the LC system? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Wohali (57372) on Sunday September 21 2003, @10:54AM (#7017797)
    (http://www.atypical.net/)
    My alma mater [yale.edu] uses the Library of Congress system [tlcdelivers.com] for numbering its books. Sure, it's not quite as simple for children to understand (a letter code, followed by numbers, then more letters), and is copyrighted, but as far as I know it's royalty-free to use.
  • This is going to destroy the hotel business by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:55AM
  • Crap by softspokenrevolution (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:57AM
    • Re:Crap by 91degrees (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:19AM
      • Re:Crap by Jeremy Erwin (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:57AM
        • Re:Crap by 91degrees (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:34PM
    • Re:Crap by softspokenrevolution (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:55AM
      • Re:Crap by jrp2 (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @02:01PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • To sue or not to sue by maizena (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:02AM
  • How did they pick the damages??? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by openbear (231388) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:02AM (#7017846)
    How on Earth did they pick the damages amount for this case?

    From the CNN [cnn.com] story ...

    "The complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Columbus seeks triple the hotel's profits since its opening or triple the organization's damages, whichever is greater, from the hotel's owner."

    "Dreitler said Saturday he and his client do not yet know the size of the hotel's profits. The center, based in Dublin, is willing to settle with the hotel's owners, he said."
    If this does not scream frivolous lawsuit (or lottery ticket lawsuit) then I don't know what does. I thought if you were suing someone for "damages" that you had pick an amount, not just claim "triple whatever is going to get me the most money".

    This is more proof that the legal system in the US is severely broken and abused.

  • Oh good grief (Score:4, Interesting)

    I spent three years working in a library and learning the dewey decimal system. Three guesses how my home media are organised. (No, not by Soviet Russia or by Natalie Portman, who let you guys in here, anyway?) By dewey decimal, of course. And now i have to think about how much i really want to keep this system... i don't hold with the idea of having to license something so overwhelmingly widely used. (and i wasn't aware that our library paid a license fee. (In fact, i don't remember that in our expenses at all, which makes me wonder whether it fell under 'miscellaneous,' or whether our relatively-new library simply failed to bother...) either way, i feel that the system should be free (as in beer) because it's... a filing system used primarily by nonprofit entities, and of course that's only my fond wish, but i'm hoping that the next system will be free. Otherwise- Hold on while i go patent the alphabet as a filing system. And copyright it. Every keyboard company will be paying me money... heh heh heh....

    oke. Back to subject. This leads me to the next question. How much sense does it make to make libraries pay for one more thing? And will the next step be to raise this license fee? Most libraries are struggling along as it is, so i hope not. There isn't enough storage and there isn't enough funding, and it drives me crazy to see book sales held sometimes, in those cases where it's just because there's no way to maintain the full shelves.

    Let me rephrase this. Most libraries are non-profit entities. Five bucks a year isn't a lot of money, but it's money being charged for a standard system that would take a lot of time and effort to shift away from. Maybe derivative works should be allowed; if a hotel is using it for anything other than books, maybe it should be hailed as an innovative way to make people more aware of the system itself. But i'm willing to accept that the system 'owners' may have the legal right to collect... it's the obsessive nature of this particular instance that bothers me. *shrug* i could be way off-base.

    So... the most important point here, i think, is: What's a better way? And how can we make it free to libraries and other non-profits?

    • Re:Oh good grief (Score:5, Informative)

      by Meowing (241289) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:21AM (#7017954)
      (http://www.meowing.net/)
      and i wasn't aware that our library paid a license fee. (In fact, i don't remember that in our expenses at all, which makes me wonder whether it fell under 'miscellaneous,' or whether our relatively-new library simply failed to bother...)

      It's sort of a hidden fee. The DDC book costs about $400, new edition every 3 years or so.

      Note though, that the hotel isn't being sued for using the classification system, but for infringing on the Dewey trademark for commercial purposes.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Oh good grief by satyap (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:48AM
      • Re:Oh good grief by cmpalmer (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:20PM
      • OOK by solprovider (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:15PM
    • Re:Oh good grief by babbage (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:17PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • it will never end. by deft (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:04AM
  • This is absurd. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by An Onerous Coward (222037) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:04AM (#7017858)
    (http://www.cs.utah.edu/~andersbr/)
    Even if the complaint was reasonable, the damages being sought are beyond absurd. Triple the profits the hotel has made since it opened? First, I can't imagine how the OCLC was damaged beyond the loss of revenue they would have gotten from a license. Second, I can't imagine that every cent of profit the hotel made over the last three years was a direct result of their use of the Dewey Decimal system. Perhaps some of it came from, I dunno, being conveniently placed in the middle of New York?

    It would only make sense that they should have to prove that every customer who stayed there wouldn't have were it not for their use of the Dewey Decimal system.

    It sounds like this non-profit actually serves a useful purpose, but I really hope that if this goes to court, their damages get capped at around $4500 (triple the money the hotel saved by not buying a license).
  • Sue'ing Crazy by nite87 (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:09AM
  • Obligatory Futurama Quote: by Lyrrad (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:11AM
  • 500 Dollars per YEAR??? by Denver_80203 (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:12AM
  • It's a Trademark infringement case. (Score:4, Informative)

    by ExRex (47177) <elliot@nOSpaM.inch.com> on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:18AM (#7017938)

    The suit is for trademark infringement, not copyright or patent infringement.

    In the U.S. Trademark rights can be held indefinitely by the registrant, or it's successors in interest as in this case, with timely filing of required paperwork and paying of appropriate fees.

    What I find amusing is that the designer's of the hotel clearly did not do their homework. The research branch of the New York Public Library doesn't even use the Dewey system. It uses the Library of Congress categories. Here's the NYPL's online catalog. [nypl.org] I guess the designer's went into the Library to look at the architecture, but didn't actually bother to call for a book, or even check the catalog. Had they, they wouldn't be in this pickle.

  • Why the shock? by fname (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:19AM
  • Interesting thing about this lawsuit .... by anagama (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:19AM
  • Amazing level of greed by mc6809e (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:20AM
  • Fantastic publicity by FTL (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:21AM
  • Random stuff about the DDC system by Cryptonom (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:23AM
  • LOC? (Score:3, Informative)

    by sootman (158191) on Sunday September 21 2003, @11:25AM (#7017977)
    (Last Journal: Thursday July 12, @12:30PM)
    At my college (CSU, Chico) the library uses the Library of Congress system. Anyone know if that is free? If it originated with the taxpayer-supported US Gov, I would think it should be free.
  • Browser Resizing by pete-classic (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:28AM
  • HOW can this be????? by Newer Guy (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:36AM
  • Tradmark law. by Sphere1952 (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:47AM
  • Colon classification by rsidd (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:03PM
  • I wonder by Jeremy Erwin (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:04PM
  • I Used to Work for OCLC by Skjellifetti (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:10PM
  • Standards must never become IP by rollingcalf (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:17PM
  • Next thing you know... by The Lynxpro (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:26PM
  • And I use it for porn by digitalgimpus (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @12:31PM
  • Dewey Decimal? by twoslice (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:16PM
  • books versus machines by headonfire (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:27PM
  • The Answer At Last by johnos (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:36PM
  • Case summary (Score:4, Informative)

    by danila (69889) on Sunday September 21 2003, @01:45PM (#7018970)
    (http://future.wikicities.com/)
    Initially I read the Slashdot comments only and was under the impression that the DDC's lawsuit may have some merit. But after visiting the hotel's site I was completely fucking outraged at the American IP legal climate...

    Here is what I found. The hotel uses something which very much resembles the original DDC classification, which is in public domain. As the site states, "Each of the ten guestroom floors of the Library is dedicated to one of the ten major categories of the Dewey Decimal System: Social Sciences, Literature, Languages, History, Math & Science, General Knowledge, Technology, Philosophy, The Arts and Religion. Each of the sixty exquisitely appointed accommodations have been individually adorned with a collection of art and books relevant to one distinctive topic within the category of floor [libraryhotel.com] it belongs to.".

    It's simply fucking insane that DDC is suing the hotel for that. I mean, WTF?! They claim trademark infridgement? They use the basic classification which is probably the same as original one, created 130 years ago and is now in public domain. If they use it, they are completely within their rights to call it "Dewey Decimal System" because that's what it is. And it's not like the hotel is in any competition with DDC. Nor any customers will be confused that the hotel is somehow affiliated with DDC. Stupid lawsuit and the whole concept of IP should be trashed. It's long overdue.
  • Someone PLEASE kill all the lawyers! by pair-a-noyd (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:47PM
  • What kind of bullshit is that? by zachjb (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:49PM
  • Heh.... by nitrocloud (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:51PM
  • A little more info... by tsm_sf (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @01:52PM
  • I've stayed there -- its a nice place by leko (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @02:46PM
  • Testing the waters. by CherniyVolk (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @03:26PM
  • So they think they're smart? by RAMMS+EIN (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @04:33PM
  • oh thank heaven by LordMyren (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @05:14PM
  • Why it's not free by fm6 (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @05:50PM
  • Great Example of Lawyer Gibberish by serutan (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @06:53PM
  • Trademark, not copyright by stilleon (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @08:30PM
  • trademark is a Strange Creature(tm) by akahige (Score:2) Sunday September 21 2003, @10:36PM
  • As I was Googling for a tree... by Quizo69 (Score:2) Monday September 22 2003, @04:53AM
  • sheesh... by Fry-kun (Score:1) Tuesday September 23 2003, @01:32AM
  • Re:wheel by BabyDave (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:03AM
    • Re:wheel by potpie (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:12AM
  • Re:their site sucks by rblancarte (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:32AM
  • Re:I never trusted any decimal system by Izago909 (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:32AM
  • Re:What do you expect by Blondie-Wan (Score:1) Sunday September 21 2003, @11:54AM
  • 23 replies beneath your current threshold.