Richard, - Good point, but there's a question about whether or not the par file - constitutes a "work" I suppose. Well, since I can establish a direct relationship between the PAR data and the image it produces, I think a relatively convincing argument could be made that using PAR data without permission would constitute copyright infringement. I think our current copyright regime in the US is ridiculous. Copyright is a trade-off: a temporary monopoly given to creative people in exchange for eventual release into the public domain. They get to profit from their creativity for a while, to encourage them to be creative, and then society eventually gets to enjoy the fruits of their labor. The problem is copyright duration is now ridiculously long, and posthumously granting copyright extensions does nothing but enrich some already-rich corporations at the expense of society. All because Disney is afraid Mickey Mouse might enter the public domain, and Congress is happy to go along with it. And the Supreme Court basically avoided the issue, much to Lessig's disappointment. I believe copyright is a valid principle, but terms should be shorter, more like 17 years or so. Enough time to make money, but not so long as to rob the public domain. I believe in fair use, so I oppose DRM in all forms: the computer can't decide what's fair or not, so DRM will always choose badly in some cases. (And it only takes one allowed use to get the DRM stripped out, making the game pointless anyway.) I don't want a machine guessing whether I have the right to copy something; I want messy, legal processes that mean it has to be worth it to somebody to make an issue over it. Oh well, this is only *one* way in which our world is screwed up. It's certainly not the most important. :-) --Damien