That might actually be licensed, though.
-- Harry
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Richard Farmbrough <richard@farmbrough.co.uk
wrote:
I wonder if http://www.popartuk.com/**photography/london/red-bus-on-** westminster-bridge-ph0408-**poster.asphttp://www.popartuk.com/photography/london/red-bus-on-westminster-bridge-ph0408-poster.aspwould have been considered enough to make the idea non-novel.
On 25/01/2012 22:23, geni wrote:
On 25 January 2012 19:18, Magnus Manske<magnusmanske@**googlemail.commagnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:
...photos that somehow look similar:
http://www.**amateurphotographer.co.uk/**news/photographers_face_** copyright_threat_after_shock_**ruling__news_311191.htmlhttp://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/photographers_face_copyright_threat_after_shock_ruling__news_311191.html
The servers are safe (well, relatively speaking) in the U.S., but should people in the UK be concerned when uploading images?
Magnus
Nothing new here. Its always been understood that in theory if you see a photo and take another photo that is similar enough to it to be considered a derivative work that that is a copyright violation. However in most cases it would be extremely hard to prove and people don't care enough to try.
______________________________**_________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-lhttp://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org