One can be certain that the fabric industry has generated its own charming and peculiar caselaw, as one company modifies another's design in the eternal quest for the perfect fabric. Fabric is certainly a tangible medium, and the expressions often contain originality beyond function, so copyright must exist. But, it does seem as though fair use might kick in here. It would be hard to argue that my photo is going to hurt awning sales. However, if my photo directly portrays the floral print, in some obvious way, and (extending the argument a bit) suppose I scan the photo, extract the floral print and then use the print as the basis for a line of greeting cards, then indeed I'm likely to run into trouble. Where is the line between the fair and the unfair use? In the courtroom. Alternatively, if the photo happens to be a magnification of the "weave" rather than of the floral pattern placed upon the fabric, then it could be that certain weaves are protected by trademark, patent, or even trade secret. Weaving, by virtue of its containment of mathematical knot theory, is sufficiently complex that one can no doubt pose undecidable questions in the metalanguage of weaving, construct Turing machines, and so forth. All of this tends to suggest (to this naive observer) the laws governing algorithm and process and despite the fact that software is currently thought of as literature rather than as process. Most processes (and their by-products) seem to be protected by patent law. More on tiling below.