On Dec 11, 2003, at 16:31, Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
However, what is the reason for qualifying the resulting work as an original work of authorship? The definition seems to suggest that the _compilation_ must be original, not its parts.
Yep, that's right. In the US (other countries vary, I'm told) there must be an original work (= creative; however you want to express it) for there to be a copyright.
If your local newspaper decides to put all the papers it published in November into a book, that's not a compilation: It's not an original work of authorship; there is no creativity.
If your local newspaper decides to use some of the articles it has published to create a "portrait" of the Wright brothers, in celebration of the centennial, then that is a compilation. There is much creativity in the choice of articles to use.