On 5/3/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/3/06, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/3/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > You make some excellent points. A way of easily migrating
free images
> > once checked by confirmed users would
solve my original
problem. Can
you elaborate on these increasingly stringent demands?
Aside from the propensity of random people to tag 15th-century
paintings with {{nsd}}? ;-)
If the copy of the painting was made within the uk it is quite
posible> it is
under copyright. Or at least the copyright status
would be
rather complex.
Curious. I was under the impression that Bridgeman v Corel drew no
distinction based on where the copy was made (if the copy is accurate,
how could you tell?), and that _any_ (two-dimensional, slavish, etc.)
reproduction of a PD artwork was considered PD under US law.
I agree: if a copy is accurate, you couldn't tell. BUT, that's American law. If
a copy is made in the UK (say by a museum), and the uploader is also a Yukian, could he be
held liable by Yukian courts for copyright infringement if the museum claims copyright?
I don't know --- IANAL, IJPOOTV.
--
MarkGallagher