On 11/24/06, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
In 99% of cases, I doubt it the work done by Google would be enough to obtain copyright protection. Most of the time it isn't even something done by hand, it's something done by computer.
I think Google have done enough for it to count as a derived work. It's not just a compilation of images, they are put together in a very careful and precise way. As far as I know, it doesn't matter if something is done by hand or by computer - it's still copyrightable.
Careful and precise are not the standards for copyright protection. Creative is. In the case of an image which is completely from a single public domain source, there just isn't anything creative being done. You stitch together the tiles in a completely algorithmic manner. If anyone holds the copyright on the resulting work, it would be the person who chose what scene to picture (the user of the software), not the person who wrote the software. That is also the person who put the work in fixed form, another requirement for copyright protection.
I say show me the creativity. I don't see it. I actually don't see much creativity in any satellite photography, but when it comes to creativity from Google in a typical Google Earth shot, I don't see any at all.
This is all completely US-centric of an argument, of course. In many jurisdictions creativity isn't even required for copyright protection.
Anthony