Vol 7 No 1 - Roger Williams University School of Law

facts would be of little or no use.80 Today, database softwareperforms the tedious task of coordination and arrangement.Internet databases are generally arranged to maximize storagecapacity and only become arranged for human use upon a user’sindividual request.Free riding in the database industry has been facilitated bythe exponential increase in the speed at which data can betransmitted. In 1991, the year Feist was decided, it would havetaken the average modem, working 24 hours a day, 154 days tocopy an average sized database.81 With current modems and theadvent of DSL, the same database can be copied in 1.7 minutes.82Electronic databases on the Internet afford many advantages,such as access and ease of subsequent modifications; however,accessibility also facilitates data piracy. A closed network wouldallow for a higher level of security and easier detection ofunauthorized uses, but is more difficult and time-consuming andmay tend to discourage use.83 As internet applications becomemore widespread, consumers expect access to data over the web.Moreover, the mere ability to protect a database with anticopyingtechnology does not necessarily obviate the need for legalprotection. The fact that a landowner can erect a fence around hisproperty does not mean he should forfeit a cause of action fortrespassing. The question currently before U.S. legislators is whatkind of fences should be created and what kind of trespass claimsshould be allowed.B. Reasons For Providing Sui Generis Protection of DatabasesThere are several reasons for providing sui generis protectionfor databases. First, the collection and organization of datarequire a large up-front investment. Second, the accessibility ofinformation in the digital information age has made the wholesalecopying of large compilations a simple task. Third, there isconsiderable concern among U.S. companies that the lack ofprotection in Europe, in the absence of reciprocal protection in theUnited States, will put them at a distinct competitivedisadvantage.80. Id. at 3.81. Id. at 5.82. Id.83. Id.