John Q wrote:

>The analogy that occurs to me is that the conlanger is like someone how has invented, say, Lego blocks and demonstrates to the world how >you can build a simulacrum of a house with them.  There's no stopping anyone else from now using those Lego blocks to build a simulacrum of >a tree, a duck, a space-ship, or using them to make an abstract sculpture, making a pair of pants out of them, or even putting the Lego blocks >into a pie and baking it in the oven.>

Hopefully Lego may only stop the blockmakers and not the block users.
But the blocks of conlangs are not made of plastic, they are written strings of fonts, and now sounds in movie tracks it seems.
There are plenty of links to click on along this thread, but as we say on this tiny strip of the side of the Pond: "Accumulation n'est pas raison".

So I'm still interested whether a text, audio or video file meant for the public and featuring conlang materials could be considered as a questionable copy of original works over there.
Even if each block could not be considered a piece of original works in itself, maybe their accumulation in the file could be considered as the copy of an extensive part of original works like of a novel, movie, grammar, dictionary, you name it, beyond the obvious need of quoting or discussing them?
Would then the fact that the accumulated blocks probably never appear in the file in the same order as in the original works dismiss the case?
Etc. quite apart from the fact that conlangers are already free to relinquish their possible rights under CCs or else.

On a completely different topic, the cold-blooded way you managed to close your Russian adventure is extremely impressive.