On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
2009/7/11 Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com:
This is where in the US, Bridgeman v Corel established that a "slavish" reproduction of a PD work does not constitute a new work that can be protected by copyright.
We know that isn't the case under UK law, the question is whether the photographs involved substantial investment of resources.
No we don't. The specific matter at hand has never been in front of a court. It's just not clear cut, but it wasn't in the US prior to bridgeman either.
I don't know if there is precise precedent, but from what I've read I think most people agree that "sweat of the brow" is, at least in some cases, enough under UK law.
I suppose we'd need a humidity reading from the room in which the photos were taken.
-Andrew