On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
By the common meaning of the word "original", I'd say the photograph *is* original. OTOH, under US precedent it *probably* isn't within the US legal meaning of the term.
I should add that, in my US analysis, I was making the assumption that there was no creative post-processing of the photograph, which on second thought is not a safe assumption.