On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 08:54:56 -0400, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Not as text, it appears as a pictorial representation.
So the use in question is highly transformative. That's one factor in favor.
Not really, no. It's no more transformative than transcribing a radio script. Which is, of course, a violation of copyright.
And the Cool Wall *doesn't* appear in its entirety, if you're claiming that is the work in question. Only the text of the wall appears, rearranged in a non-creative order. That's another factor which is neutral at worst.
I miss about one in three, so obviously I have only seen the ones where it does.
Guy (JzG)