Can I sell access to viewing a compiled list of business emails?

[indrosum]

I'm thinking of selling a product that includes a list of emails sent out by other businesses as examples for my industry. These emails are sent out to subscribers of their lists. I'm wondering if there would be any legal issues with doing this? I was reading the '"air use" rules and it seems like it fall under that category as the purpose would be for comment, criticism, and research. Here's what I was reading, "Under the 'fair use' defense, another author may make limited use of the original author's work without asking permission. Pursuant to 17 U.S. Code 107, certain uses of copyrighted material 'for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright". 'As a matter of policy, fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights. If you write or publish, you need a basic understanding of what does and does not constitute fair use". Am I OK doing this or would I run into legal issues?

 

[quincy]

What is the name of your state?

I am not real clear what you want to do with the email lists or how you are acquiring these lists. Customer lists and mailing lists are often protected as trade secrets.

Could you please offer a better explanation of where you are getting these lists and emails? Thanks.

Commercial uses of rights-protected material is rarely considered a fair use of the material.

 

[indrosum]

The emails come from just signing up for newsletters, free downloads, etc. Then they send out daily or weekly emails. They would be emails coming to my inbox that I would then post for reference for others who are paying me a subscription.

 

[justalayman]

Why would people pay you for copies of emails you received? What you are selling isn’t making any sense to me.


And what you are suggesting is not fair use. If you read the law more closely you will notice it refers to excerpts or parts of a work.. Then, the purpose for quoting that work is also critical to the decision and nothing you have posted suggests it would fall under any of the allowed reasons.

 

[indrosum]

I would be making a "library" of sorts of the emails, it would be for reference (searchable, tagged, etc.)...

 

[quincy]

The emails come from just signing up for newsletters, free downloads, etc. Then they send out daily or weekly emails. They would be emails coming to my inbox that I would then post for reference for others who are paying me a subscription.

So you intend to publish only emails sent to you from various sources and offer commentary?

Although the specifics are best reviewed by an attorney in your area, I do not offhand see anything wrong with publishing the emails you have received.

An email's contents potentially could be copyright protected but very few emails would be original and creative enough to be eligible for registration. Federal registration is required for a copyright infringement suit.

I would worry less about copyright laws and more about what you say in any commentary. You must handle trademarks and reputations with care - and you must avoid publishing any messages sent to you with the understanding they would remain confidential.

 

[indrosum]

Thank you @quincy and everyone, that helps!

 

[quincy]

Thank you @quincy and everyone, that helps!

You're welcome, indrosum. We all appreciate the thanks, so thank you.

I recommend you have your specific plans personally reviewed by an attorney in your area to ensure you are on solid legal ground.

Good luck.

 

[indrosum]

For sure, wanted to make sure I wasn't way off the mark before I jumped in feet first. Thanks again!

 

[quincy]

For sure, wanted to make sure I wasn't way off the mark before I jumped in feet first. Thanks again!

It is always best to check on legalities first. It is far more expensive to check the legalities after you have been sued.

Good luck.

 

[adjusterjack]

Once you use the word "selling" fair use goes out the door and infringement comes in the window.

 

[quincy]

Once you use the word "selling" fair use goes out the door and infringement comes in the window.

Not really. It depends on the use.

For example, Cliffs Notes are sold and they use the copyrighted material of others. Consumers Reports magazines are sold and they use the trademarks of others. Neither infringe on the rights of the copyright or trademark holders.

 

[FlyingRon]

Are we talking about just selling the email addresses or the actual contents of the emails? The addresses aren't something that can be protected by copyright (simple facts). The email messages belong to the people who wrote them.

 

[quincy]

Are we talking about just selling the email addresses or the actual contents of the emails? The addresses aren't something that can be protected by copyright (simple facts). The email messages belong to the people who wrote them.

Emails once sent are the property of the one who received them but the contents of the emails are (arguably) the copyrighted property of the sender.

The problem with trying to prevent under copyright laws the sharing of emails you send is that you probably did not compose an email creative and original enough to be worth registering with the US Copyright Office or filing an infringement suit over.

The issue of privacy or defamation might be more likely legal avenues explored over shared content.

The publication and use of email addresses potentially could be more problematic, depending on the source of the lists and reasons for publication. Customer lists are often protected as trade secrets.

But it does not sound like indrosum wants to do anything but compile, publish and sell the emails he has received from others.

This has been done in the past for comedic purposes by both Jerry Seinfeld and James Veitch. The "Letters From a Nut" books are an example.

The specific emails and purpose behind publication should be professionally reviewed to make sure no legal lines get crossed that could result in a lawsuit.

 

[FlyingRon]

I stand by my statement. The SENDER is irrelevant. Copyright stems from when the person WROTE the body of the message.

Eh? My mail system keeps a copy of every message I send. That's certainly going to be as good of evidence as anything else online. Further, if Mr. I publishes it with the proper attribution rather than just stealing the body text, it should be fairly clear that the content is my protected work.

The list of addresses might be a trade secret, but I can bet if Mr. I has them, than no attempt to treat such as secret has occurred.