I guess this is bit color, then (a similar "random" example is used in the Colour essay somebody else linked.) Thanks for mentioning "derivative work", it's a

I guess this is bit color, then (a similar "random" example is used in the Colour essay somebody else linked.) Thanks for mentioning "derivative work", it's a good key word to look into this further. After skimming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work I guess one question is, is applying cryptography "transformative"? To take it in a slightly different direction, since parody has been upheld, what about a deterministic, reversible, mechanical parodic transformation? AFAIK machine-created works can't be given a copyright, but I'm not asking for that, merely that a machine can create a sufficiently transformative derivative work. In fact, maybe it doesn't even need to be parody. In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Amazon.com.... search engines were permitted to serve thumbnails of copyrighted images because the copies "served a different function than [the original] use – improving access to information on the Internet versus artistic expression." In the same way, an e-book could be "improving access" rather than offering "artistic expression." I guess establishing "transformation" is a bit tricky -- presumably ASCII-encoding an English book's text is not transformative. But it seems like somehow you could come up with something interesting and legal, even if it's not quite like my original formulation. Google Books' excerpts are probably like this. Oh, and after re-reading the Colour article, I see I am not even all that innovative: http://monolith.sourceforge.net/ http://monolith.sourceforge.net/