Your understanding is incorrect. In the US (which doesn't apply for this case!) the original case showing that the collection of data is NOT copyrightable was, in fact, a case about copying a phone book. See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Tel...</a>