Compilations are things like phone books, or a street directory.
If we took your logic, then all books are merely compilations of the alphabet, or dictionary. Judges would look at that and think "wait no, that breaks everything"
If we took your logic, then all books are merely compilations of the alphabet, or dictionary. Judges would look at that and think "wait no, that breaks everything"
What about books of driving directions? Before ubiquitous access to navigation applications, I would have AAA assemble a book of directions for long trips. Each page represented instructions on which decisions I were to make AND when to make them.
I would argue that code represents an equivalent level of abstraction to the book of directions. The language's grammar being equivalent to the available choices on the road system.
> Judges would look at that and think "wait no, that breaks everything"
Is that not how new precedent is set?
> Is that not how new precedent is set?
That's kinda my point. I doubt judges want to set a precent that all books are now "compilations".