For the same reason, theories, predictions, or conclusions that are asserted to be facts are uncopyrightable, even if the assertion of fact is erroneous or incorrect. See, e.g., Hoehling v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 618 F.2d 972, 978–79 (2d Cir. 1980); Nash v. CBS, Inc., 899 F.2d 1537, 1541 (7th Cir. 1990).
Although facts are not copyrightable, a work of authorship that contains factual information may be registered, provided that the work contains a sufficient amount of original authorship. For example, a newspaper may be registered, but the registration does not cover “[t]he news element – the information respecting current events contained in the [publication],” because the news of the day “is not the creation of the writer, but is a report of matter that ordinarily are publici juris.” International News Service v. Associated Press, 248 U.S. 215, 234 (1918) abrogated on other grounds by Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 (1938). Likewise, “a directory that contains absolutely no protectable written expression, only facts,” may be protected by copyright only “if it features an original selection or arrangement.” Feist, 499 U.S. at 348. The copyright in such works only protects the compilation expression that the author contributed to the work. “No matter how original the format … the facts themselves do not become original through association.” Id. at 349.
313.3(D) Typeface and Mere Variations of Typographic Ornamentation
The copyright law does not protect typeface or mere variations of typographic ornamentation or lettering. 37 C.F.R. § 202.1(a), (e).
A typeface is a set of letters, numbers, or other symbolic characters with repeating design elements that are consistently applied in a notational system that is intended to be used in composing text or other combinations of characters. H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, at 55 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5668. Typeface includes typefonts, letterforms, and the like. Registrability of Computer Programs that Generate Typefaces, 57 Fed. Reg. 6,201, 6,202 (Feb. 21, 1992).
The U.S. Copyright Office cannot register a claim to copyright in typeface or mere variations of typographic ornamentation or lettering, regardless of whether the typeface is commonly used or truly unique. Likewise, the Office cannot register a simple combination of a few typefonts, letterforms, or typeface designs with minor linear or spatial variations. In Eltra Corp. v. Ringer, 579 F.2d 294 (4th Cir. 1978) the Office refused to register a typeface design under the 1909 Act. Both the District Court and the Court of Appeals affirmed the Office’s decision, noting that “typeface has never been considered entitled to copyright under the provisions of [the 1909 Act].” 579 F.2d at 298. The Fourth Circuit noted that many parties have asked “Congress to amend the law in order to provide copyright protection to typeface” and “[j]ust as consistently Congress has refused to grant the protection.” Id. Congress addressed this issue when it drafted the 1976 Act and concluded that typeface is not copyrightable. The House Report expressly states: “The Committee does not regard the design of typeface, as thus defined, to be a copyrightable ‘pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work’ within the meaning of this bill….” H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, at 55 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5668–69.
For the same reasons, the Office cannot register a claim that is based solely on calligraphy because calligraphy is a stylized form of handwriting that is a mere variation
