On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 08:54:56 -0400, Anthony <wikilegal(a)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)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG