In a message dated 12/8/2008 4:48:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com writes: If the album cover is the key feature of the picture (which it would be, since that's the point of making the picture) then it could well be enough.>> -------------------- I think it would be a hard case to win to try to suppose what the "intent" of the picture taker was. Substantially similar means that a typical person would say, "Oh that's the same object" in a slightly different form. A picture of you, holding an album cover, is the same object as a picture of the album cover. Not in my book. Me standing in front of the Taj Mahal is not the Taj Mahal. It would be interesting however if someone were to stand in Times Square and sue everyone who was taking pictures of each other. Since obviously their *intent* is to violate the copyright of the giant billboards behind them.... Will Johnson **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaol…)