is ample uncontested evidence of originality to surpass the minimum Feist standard. Accordingly, the copyrights for the Bytes Files are valid. b. Merger Doctrine GeoData argues that, in any event, under the so-called “merger doctrine,” the Bytes Files are not capable of being copyrighted. In some circumstances, even if the originality requirement is satisfied, a work is not entitled to copyright protection “where there is only one or so few ways of expressing an idea that protection of the expression would effectively accord protection to the idea itself.” Kregos v. Associated Press, 937 F.2d 700, 705 (2d Cir.1991). As already articulated above, there were many ways that the City could have “drawn” its vectorized map. See Mason v. Montgomery Data, Inc., 967 F.2d 135, 138 (5th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). The City is not attempting to copyright the
recognizing that maps may be capable of a variety of expressions recognizing that immunity may be waived holding that it may not recognizing that an indictment may be dismissed in part holding as a matter of law that adaptations of subject matter or expressions in the public domain cannot support a finding of copyright infringement