It  is  in  line  with  the  views  entertained  by  Lord
EUenborough,  however,  as  expressed  in  another
early  case/  He  appears  to  have  thought  that  if
parts  of  a  work  of  non-imaginative  character  were
copied,  in  good  faith,  in  connection  with  the  com-
pilation of  a  useful  book,  for  the  benefit  of  the  public,
making  a  totally  new  arrangement  of  such  facts,
this,  to  "avoid  putting  manacles  on  science,"  was
not  to  be  deemed  piracy,  unless  merely  colorable,
with  a  view  to  stealing  plaintiff 's  copyright.  Unless
this  view  be  limited  to  fair  quotation,^  it  is  unsup-
ported by  later  authority.
"Examined  as  a  question  of  strict  law,  apart  from
exceptional  cases,"  said  Clifford,  J.,  "the  privilege
of  fair  use  accorded  to  a  subsequent  writer  must  be
such,  and  such  only,  as  will  not  cause  substantial
injury  to  the  proprietor  of  the  first  publication."*
The  difficulty  with  this  statement  of  the  law  is  that
the  cases  which  are  regarded  by  it  as  exceptional  are
so  numerous  as  to  destroy  the  value  of  any  general
rule  which  excepts  them  from  its  conclusion,  with-
out identifying  them  with  more  precision  than  by
merely  grouping  them,  as  exceptions.  As  an  enun-
ciation of  the  law  forbidding  infringement  by
copying,  the  statement  appears  sound,  but  as  a
formulation  of  the  law  of  "fair  use,"  to  be  pregnant
with  misunderstanding.  Judge  Clifford  also  said,
in  the  same  case,  that  fair  use  will  not  permit  the
borrowing  of  materials,  nor  the  use  of  their  plan,  or
arrangement  and  mode  of  combination  with  the  text,
as  fair  use  only  applies  to  the  use  of  materials,  and
not  to  plan,  arrangement  and  mode  of  combination.
