Note: This doctrine is no longer accepted under U.S. law: > The United States rejected this doctrine in the 1991 United States Supreme Court case Feist Publica

Note: This doctrine is no longer accepted under U.S. law: > The United States rejected this doctrine in the 1991 United States Supreme Court case Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service; until then it had been upheld in a number of US copyright cases. > Under the Feist ruling in the US, mere collections of facts are considered unoriginal and thus not protected by copyright, no matter how much work went into collating them. The arrangement and presentation of a collection may be original, but not if it is "simple and obvious" such as a list in alphabetical or chronological order. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow#United_State...