>I f the creator cared, he'd make it longer. I'm sorry, and would like to know how to put it another way to not sound aggressive, but this point is absurd[1].

>I f the creator cared, he'd make it longer. I'm sorry, and would like to know how to put it another way to not sound aggressive, but this point is absurd[1]. Length (in this case runtime) of the resulting product has little to no relation to the amount of work or value put into it and its development[2]. 1- I'm not even sure why'd you use code as an example, because it is the easiest counterexample to your point. Hundred-line programs can be trivial exercises or crucial pieces of engineering that make or break entire products or businesses (if code should or not be copyrightable is another discussion). 2 - Somehow this discussion also reminds of the time a bureaucrat asked me why I was taking twenty hours to 'read a paper' when it was only a few pages long. I told him it likely took the authors a hundred hours to write six pages rather than sixteen so I could read it in twenty hours instead of two hundred.