> This is a bad analogy. You don't need to copy title and chapter names to allow other people to "interoperate" (read, scan, and index I guess?) with the book.

Bad analogies are inevitable, and aren't the commenter's fault. It's the Federal Circuit's fault, for trying to blur the lines between functional matters (the domain of patents) and copyright matters. Any analogy that's simple enough to quickly understand will suffer from basically this same flaw, or else not apply to this case.