[Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton at gmail.com
Sat Jul 11 01:44:28 UTC 2009


2009/7/11 Andrew Lih <andrew.lih at gmail.com>:
> Yes, and the letter from NPG seems to assert that:
>
> "...we can confirm that every one of the images that you have copied
> is the product of a painstaking exercise on the part of the
> photographer that created the image in which significant time, skill,
> effort and artistry have been employed and that there can therefore be
> no doubt that under UK law all of those images are copyright works
> under s.1(1)(a) of the CDPA"
>
> This is where in the US, Bridgeman v Corel established that a
> "slavish" reproduction of a PD work does not constitute a new work
> that can be  protected by copyright.

We know that isn't the case under UK law, the question is whether the
photographs involved substantial investment of resources.



More information about the foundation-l mailing list