Detailed Instructions: In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Problem:headings from the approximately 34,000 options in the heading book. With so many related headings to describe a business principally known as a bakery, BAPCO's arrangement of the listing of a particular bakery under one, two, three, four, or more headings is neither "obvious" nor "practically inevitable" as defined in Feist. See Feist, 499 U.S. at -, 111 S.Ct. at 1297, 113 L.Ed.2d at 380. Accordingly, the evidence is clear that BAPCO's arrangement was in no sense mechanical. On the contrary, the 1984 Yellow Pages reflects several layers of BAP-CO choices on grouping 106,398 business listings under approximately 7,000 classified headings, which BAPCO selected from a heading book containing 4,700 primary entries and 34,000 related headings. Accord Key Publications, 945 F.2d at 514 (<HOLDING>). Donnelley challenges BAPCO's evidence of an
Holding statements: (A) holding that conversion and unjust enrichment claims were preempted by the copyright act since they were not qualitatively different from a copyright claim because they contained no extra element beyond those necessary to show copyright infringement (B) holding that a classified publishers grouping of over 9000 listings into approximately 260 different categories constituted original arrangement entitled to copyright protection (C) holding that lprs are entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause (D) holding that that choices as to selection and arrangement are entitled to copyright protection only so long as they are made independently (E) holding over
Solution:
holding that conversion and unjust enrichment claims were preempted by the copyright act since they were not qualitatively different from a copyright claim because they contained no extra element beyond those necessary to show copyright infringement