sum of those icons or features, copyright protection. Thus the critical question becomes whether the screen display and graphical user interface are protectable as a compilation: whether the selection and arrangement of the icons, the layouts of the windows on the screen, and the dialog boxes which comprise the graphical user interface are themselves protectable as expression. In most cases, while the constituent elements of the user interface or screen display are not independently protectable, the user interface is protectable as a compilation with respect to its “unique selection and arrangement of all these features.” See Apple Computer Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, 35 F.3d 1435, 1446 (9th Cir.1994); Mitek Holdings, Inc. v. Arce Eng’g Co. Inc., 89 F.3d 1548, 1554 (11th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>); Engineering Dynamics, Inc. v. Structural
holding that that choices as to selection and arrangement are entitled to copyright protection only so long as they are made independently holding that a user interface here a screen display itself an audiovisual work may be entitled to copyright protection as a compilation holding that lprs are entitled to the protection of the equal protection clause holding that while the computer program at issue was within the subject matter of copyright the right sought under state law pursuant to a license was not equivalent to the exclusive rights under copyright as such copyright preemption did not apply recognizing that patent protection extends to elements not protected adequately by copyright