🚀 go-pugleaf

> This is the same as the story that the map is not the territory:  you cannot copyright
> where one street is in relation to another, but you can copyright the map 
> describing the relationship.  When someone copies the map, even if there is some
> format conversion (e.g., color to black & white, or reduction) that is copyright
> violation.  It is not the same as creating a new map.


I imagine you are correct.  I am NOT saying I
disagree with these laws (and I am NOT saying I
agree with them, either).  But I think it is important
to realize that the distinctions being made are
arbitrary.  Someone is saying, "I have to draw the
line somewhere, so I am going to use *this* criterion."
Consider:  the font artist will be just as injured if
I copy from the printed version as if I copy from the
floppy disk, with transformations.  And the jury may
have to go on someone's testimony that I was seen doing
the dirty deed, because one may not be able to tell the
difference otherwise.

And what if I do some hand tailoring after the perhaps
illicit copy?  What then?