Ordinary pictures of out of copyright paintings remain in the public domain, after all, a photograph is just a copy. The usual issue arises when you attempt to photograph the picture itself while it is in a venue controled by its owner or licensee who may attempt to impose restrictions on what you may do while you are in the space.
Fred
From: Robin Shannon robin.shannon@gmail.com Reply-To: Robin Shannon robin.shannon@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:39:31 +1100 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Painting copyright
The copyright on the paintings of the great masters are obviously all well out of date, however, does this mean that straight photos of these are uncopyrightable? Or are they like translations of the classics which are copyrightable. It just seems that not enough has been down by taking a photo (or photocopying or scanning or however the hell it is that art galleries make thier pictures of paintings) to really justify calling it a new work in its own right.
Anyone know the answer? Even any unqualified people want to take a stab at guessing the answer?
Also if they are copyrightable, does anyone know of any place where there are PD/open license pics of the works of the great masters?
Paz, amor y Papá Noel, rjs, [[User:The bellman]]
-- hit me: robin.shannon.id.au jab me: saudade@jabber.zim.net.au
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Recombo Plus License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l