Re: copyrighting of numbers

On Sat, 2 May 1998, Shelly Warwick <swarwick[_at_]sprynet.com> wrote:
>
> Terry Carroll <carroll[_at_]tjc.com> wrote, (among other things):
> >
> > Feist is kind of a catch-22 here: The core holding of Feist, that a
> > database is not within the scope of the copyright clause, is precisely
> > what permits protection authorized by another clause.
>
> Gee, and I thought Feist held that a database in order to be protected
> had to exhibit a very minimum level of originality in the selection and
> arrangement, not that databases couldn't be protected.

Okay, I boiled down two very detailed arguments into a couple of short paragraphs. For "a database" please read "a database of the kins at issue in Feist."

Sheesh.

--
Terry Carroll       |    "'Reprehensible' is just a five-syllable
Santa Clara, CA     |    word for 'scumbag.'"
carroll[_at_]tjc.com     |               - U.S. Congressman
Modell delendus est |                 Christopher Cox (R-Cal.)