Re: GNU Free Database License

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   >There are also other things in the OED that can actually be
   >copyrighted.

   You have as yet provided no reason for anyone to believe that the
   definitions themselves are not subject to copyright.

I did infact provide such a reason, maybe you disagree with it, but
that is beside the point.  They are not very creative, and hence not
subject to copyright IMHO.  They are also facts, so that is yet
another reason why a dictionary should not be subjected to copyright.
How you rpesent those definition is on the other hand subject to
copyright.

| >   Writing all those definitions in the dictionary requires
| >   creativity, so you get copyright on the dictionary.

| >It is about as creative as listing phone numbers and names