Re: Question About GNU General Public License

[telford]

In gnu.misc.discuss David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

> My eyesight seems to get worse.  I fail to see a quote of a court
> ruling stating that extracted symbol tables would not fall under the
> original copyright.

I'm pretty sure a symbol table would fall under the "phonebook"
ruling that a table of facts presented in obvious (i.e. non-creative)
format and ordering cannot be considered a creative work.

Mind you, Australian courts have protected tables of facts based on
the creativity that the table contains a limited subset of all possible
facts (if I remember rightly the table in question was part numbers for
motorcar components and suppliers of compatible parts). I think that
the US courts have been a bit more resolute about refusing to protect
phonebook style data but these things swing with the political climate.

        - Tel