Re: GNU Free Database License

[Merijn de Weerd]

On 2006-09-16, Alfred M. Szmidt <ams@gnu.org> wrote:
> I was responding to this part, where you imply that the amount of work
> is what matters:
>
>| Making a list of words with definitions is a lot of work.  So a
>| dictionary is certain protected by copyright.

Right, sorry about that! I meant to say "lot of creative work".
The amount of actual work is irrelevant. It must have been late :)

> It is about as creative as listing phone numbers and names, or
> producing a list of genomes.  We disagree that a dictionary can be
> copyrighted, I don't consider it a very creative processes at all.  I
> don't have any references, but I seem to recall that only the
> "presentation" of a dictionary can be copyrighted, which is just about
> the only creative work involved in producing a dictionary.  Same deal
> with a phone book, really.

Well, I do think there's a difference between listing names
and numbers on the one hand, and listing words and definitions
on the other hand.

Is it really trivial to make a definition for a word, phrase
or expression? 

Merijn

-- 
Remove +nospam to reply