# can a simple list of numbers be copyrighted? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 13, 2016, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010 "2016-01-13T03:20:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/21 "2016-01-13T17:13:49Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Only engineered (that is, creative) genetic material can be patented. You can’t patent naturally occurring gene sequences. Anyway patent, trademarks and copyrights are all different things in intellectual property law and we’re discussing copyright here. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/22 "2016-01-13T18:24:14Z")
Numbers cannot be trademarked. That is why [Intel stopped giving their processors numbered names](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium#History) (286, 386, and 486) and moved to words (Pentium, Xeon, etc.). ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/23 "2016-01-13T18:25:38Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Only engineered (that is, creative) genetic material can be patented. You can’t patent naturally occurring gene sequences. > **[Henrietta Lacks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks)** > > This is an accepted version of this page > > > > Henrietta Lacks (born Loretta Pleasant; August 1, 1920 – October 4, 1951) was an African-American woman whose cancer cells are the source of the HeLa cell line, the first immortalized human cell line\[A\] and one of the most important cell lines in medical research. An immortalized cell line reproduces indefinitely under specific conditions, and the HeLa cell line continues to be a source of invaluable medical data to the present day. > Lacks was the unw... > [@](#): > > there are almost 11,000 patents involving HeLa cells. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/24 "2016-01-13T18:35:39Z")
In 2013 there was a ruling in the US supreme court that naturally occurring DNA sequences could not be patented. So probably most of the patents involving HeLa cells are not valid anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/25 "2016-01-13T19:14:12Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > [Henrietta Lacks - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks) Patents _involving_ HeLa cells, not patents of HeLa cells. HeLA cells used today have been modified with genes inserted from the HPV virus, among others. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/26 "2016-01-13T20:23:10Z")
> [@Ignotus](#): > > Any book is a simple list of ASCII numbers. And yeah, it can be copyrighted. A book can be expressed as a series of numbers but they wouldn’t be a random series. If somebody went through and deleted every hundredth character, you’d almost certainly be able to figure out what those missing characters were from the remaining text. But if you had a phone book and somebody deleted every hundredth character, the missing numbers would be lost - there’s no way you can deduce a missing digit in a phone number from the digits around it. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/27 "2016-01-13T21:34:12Z")
Of course, one might argue that that makes the phone book even _more_ creative than the works of Shakespeare. > [@](#): > > Quoth **RNATB** : > > Oh, god, they’re brilliant. Serious question: what the hell does one use a book like that for? Nowadays? Not much, since we have computerized random number generators. But back in the day, a book like that _was_ your random number generator. A commenter near the bottom of the page gives one (possibly fictional, but plausible) example: He wanted to do a random survey of some region, and used the book to generate random phone numbers to call. You might also use it for random inputs into a simulation, or to model some form of experimental error. ---
**Author:** ![RadicalPi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/radicalpi/32/9806_2.png) [@RadicalPi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadicalPi)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/28 "2016-01-13T22:22:38Z")
> [@Tabby\_Cat](#): > > While a list of phone numbers may not be copyright able, there are other copyright able things in a phone book - for example, layout, font. In other countries there are also database rights - see the UK for example. In the US at least, you can’t copyright a font. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/29 "2016-01-13T22:31:52Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > …back in the day, a book like that _was_ your random number generator. A commenter near the bottom of the page gives one (possibly fictional, but plausible) example: He wanted to do a random survey of some region, and used the book to generate random phone numbers to call. > > You might also use it for random inputs into a simulation, or to model some form of experimental error. Ah, thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2016, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/30 "2016-01-13T23:59:52Z")
> [@Horatio\_Hellpop](#): > > **Flash Boys** , by Michael Lewis, recounts an incident where a code writer for one of New York’s biggest investment firms downloaded a substantial amount of public domain code from an internet site, changed a few zeroes and ones, used it at work and then uploaded it to a secure server in Germany. He was arrested by the FBI for espionage because the firm regarded every bit of that code as theirs, and proprietary work. The guy is, I think, still in prison. It’s simply a list of ones and zeroes, so yeah. I’ll have to look this up, because it seems odd. First, theft of proprietary data from a company wouldn’t be espionage, I think. Something else the FBI could be involved in, yes. Second, “public domain” code is usually not really public domain. If you look closely enough you’ll see that it is covered by one of a number of open source licenses. These all have different terms, but it is quite likely that code trivially changed would be required to remain open under the license. There have been several major lawsuits around this issue. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/31 "2016-01-14T00:34:52Z")
> [@Tired\_and\_Cranky](#): > > A photograph is definitely a creative work subject to copyright. You could argue that there is some creativity in creating a 3-D scan – you had to select the subject, the scanner, and the settings under which it would be scanned. Does the lighting affect the scan? Maybe that’s a little more creativity. Would a court consider a digital scan to be like a photograph? I don’t know. With a photograph you are choosing the setting, the framing, the exposure, lighting, depth of field and many other creative decisions. A 3D scan is not effected by lighting, its quite simply a list of XYZ positions in 3D space, about as clearly a “list of facts” as you can get. Now if you’re 3D scanning a sculpture which is under copyright your 3D scan is a derived work and can be copyrighted. But a 3D scan of an ordinary house house tea pot, shouldn’t be able to copyrighted (in theory). I’m surprised there hasn’t been any relevant court rulings on similar issues. Tables of measured data of this kind are quite valuable in various engineering fields, so you’d expect cases to have arisen. Maybe they’ve all been settled privately. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/32 "2016-01-14T02:27:06Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > I’m surprised there hasn’t been any relevant court rulings on similar issues. Tables of measured data of this kind are quite valuable in various engineering fields, so you’d expect cases to have arisen. Maybe they’ve all been settled privately. Yep, that’s why there’s so little case law. From my understanding lawyers always tell clients in IP cases to settle. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Downtown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Mr\_Downtown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Downtown)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/33 "2016-01-14T04:57:59Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Numbers cannot be trademarked. _Au contraire._ Chanel No. 5. BMW 5 Series. Heinz 57. Formula 409. Levi 501’s. Boeing 747. 999 Tonic. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/34 "2016-01-14T05:02:42Z")
> [@Mr\_Downtown](#): > > _Au contraire._ Chanel No. 5. BMW 5 Series. Heinz 57. Formula 409. Levi 501’s. Boeing 747. 999 Tonic. What’s being traded marked there is the combination of a brand name and a number plus their distinctive logos. Anyone can make a perfume using the number 5, I can sell “CoreMelt No 5” perfume but I can’t sell Chanel No 5 or copy their font style or anything else. Same with your other examples. It is true that intel stopped using the x86 naming scheme because they couldn’t stop AMD calling their CPU’s the AMD 586. Thats why Intel went to the “Core” CPU naming scheme and AMD went to the K6. ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/35 "2016-01-14T05:19:32Z")
> [@Mr\_Downtown](#): > > _Au contraire._ Chanel No. 5. BMW 5 Series. Heinz 57. Formula 409. Levi 501’s. Boeing 747. 999 Tonic. I notice that there are two number 5s in this list. Should BMW sue Chanel or vice versa? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/36 "2016-01-14T15:05:13Z")
A trademark is limited to the area in which the underlying product or service is actually sold. So Chanel’s trademark is probably limited to “cosmetics and fragrances” or a category along those lines. If you make a “No. 5 table saw” nobody is going to confuse your product with Chanel’s. \*\*Acsenray \*\*can probably explain this more delicately. > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Yep, that’s why there’s so little case law. From my understanding lawyers always tell clients in IP cases to settle. As a rule, lawyers in all areas of law always tell clients to settle. But cases still get to trial occasionally. > [@Mr\_Downtown](#): > > _Au contraire._ Chanel No. 5. BMW 5 Series. Heinz 57. Formula 409. Levi 501’s. Boeing 747. 999 Tonic. For the record, BMW has not trademarked “5 Series” or any of its other model designators (at least in the US). ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/37 "2016-01-14T15:14:10Z")
> [@](#): > > I notice that there are two number 5s in this list. Should BMW sue Chanel or vice versa? That depends. Is Chanel making cars, or is BMW making perfume? Trademarks are use-dependent. There’s nothing wrong with two completely unrelated products using matching trademarks. For one example, take “Starcraft”. It’s both a computer game and a brand of recreational vehicles. If you see an RV with the word “Starcraft” on the side, you can take that as an indication that it was made by that company. If you saw a van, say, with the same word on it, you’d probably be reasonable in assuming that that company branched out, and was now also making vans. If someone else makes an RV, or camper trailer, or van, and puts that name on the side of it, without that company’s permission, they’re trying to trick you into thinking someone else made it: That’s an infringement, and the original company could sue them over it. But if you see a computer game labeled with the same word, nobody would ever assume that it was made by the RV company, and so there’s no potential for confusion, and hence no trademark infringement. ---
**Author:** ![TimeWinder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bcef8e/32.png) [@TimeWinder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TimeWinder)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/38 "2016-01-14T15:29:49Z")
> [@RadicalPi](#): > > In the US at least, you can’t copyright a font. You can’t copyright a _typeface_ (the appearance of the letters themselves), or the actual arrangement of dots that make one up (as in pre-1995-era “bitmap” fonts). You certainly can–and most font companies do–copyright a _font_, which is the software program that actually draws the typeface on the computer screen or page. ---
**Author:** ![teflon\_grut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@teflon\_grut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/teflon_grut)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010/39 "2016-01-14T16:59:29Z")
> [@Ignotus](#): > > Would this have something to do with the work being composed of numbers rather than words? > Would the short poem: _banana showdown copyright morning banana less copyright monday crown_ be more likely to be deemed as copyrightable than the number sequence 1 2 3 4 1 5 3 6 7 ? Would there be a burden of proof discrepancy? In the first one, the originator could claim that those items were arranged creatively. The burden of proof is for the copier to prove otherwise. With numbers, would the burden of proof be on the originator to prove that they are part of an intelligent series of numbers? If both are admitted to be random, then I guess the question is whether the whole process itself is the art and the product would be protected as part of that process. And then, to confuse things, what if the originator only claims to own that string of numbers if they are tabbed and using Comic Sans? That way, the originator is presenting it as design, and not as content. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-a-simple-list-of-numbers-be-copyrighted/743010.md?page=1)