Yes, I know the basics of copyright. But it's a very complex body of law, difficult to understand and to enforce, and what applies in one country may not apply in another. What you want to know, I think, is whether specific pieces of information can be copyright. And the answer to that is generally no. If you write a biography of Captain Smith, for instance, it will contain lots of factual information. If I then write a biography of the same person, it will contain mostly the same information, because we've both written factual accounts and the facts don't change. So that's acceptable. If, however, I write my book in the same style, with the same structure, and large sections of text which are almost identical, then it would be obvious to any reader that I had copied elements of your work. And if I did that without your permission you would have a case against me. None of us own factual information which is 'in the public domain', but the way in which we use it is individual and is our own creative contribution to the finished result when we write. It's those individual creative elements which constitute intellectual property, and it's that which is protected by copyright. But is it really that simple? No, it never is! Every case is different, and in the event of a dispute would be considered on its own merits.
You asked in another thread, if I remember right, whether Phil Hind would mind if you took information from ET for use in a publication of your own? I can't speak for Phil regarding the content of the Encyclopedia itself, but keep in mind that copyright (if applicable) for the content of postings in the forum belongs to each individual poster. The same would generally apply to articles in the research section.
