Re: GNU Free Database License

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > 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 :)

No worries.

   > 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?

IMHO, it is.  I think this is something we have all done when we were
younger, our teachers asking us to explain the meaning of a word,
which is why I don't find it creative at all.  It is also something
you do in math and computing science very often, defining terms that
you will use.