Besides that is irrelevant. What you meant was you need proof if you are suing for damages. You don't need proof of damages if you want someone to stop using your property.
Yes, restaurant menus are still copyrighted without question. Arguing with you about this is getting very tiresome, I suggest you go read the Wikipedia article on copyright as a starting point, or the other article I posted. Trust me, try reproducing the entire Chili's menu and see what happens. It'll be an interested experiment. Their menu is not in the public domain.
I very much doubt most entrepreneurs believe that it is a safe venture. Most people won't fight you on reproducing things if it benefits them, which is why people do it. But in reality the copyright owners are perfectly within their rights to demand a licensing fee or the removal of the property.
RIAA does not have proof of loss of damages in a lot of cases. Neither does MPAA. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/mpaa-says-no-pr.htm....
Besides that is irrelevant. What you meant was you need proof if you are suing for damages. You don't need proof of damages if you want someone to stop using your property.
Yes, restaurant menus are still copyrighted without question. Arguing with you about this is getting very tiresome, I suggest you go read the Wikipedia article on copyright as a starting point, or the other article I posted. Trust me, try reproducing the entire Chili's menu and see what happens. It'll be an interested experiment. Their menu is not in the public domain.
I very much doubt most entrepreneurs believe that it is a safe venture. Most people won't fight you on reproducing things if it benefits them, which is why people do it. But in reality the copyright owners are perfectly within their rights to demand a licensing fee or the removal of the property.