I'm slightly confused by the article. It refers to THJ vs Sheridan (2023) but that ruling was about software-generated graphs and said nothing about reproducing out-of-copyright content?

On a separate note, I found this comment intriguing:

Since I have also established, through a Freedom of Information request, that the National Gallery has been losing money on its image licensing operation, hopefully it will embrace this chance to abolish image fees altogether. Then the gallery, art historians and the public, will be practically, legally, culturally and financially better off.

Wow.

--Deryck

On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 at 19:57, Andy Mabbett <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

A recent Court of Appeal (England and Wales) case has clarified that
there is no new copyright in photographs reproducing 2D artworks that
are themselves in the public domain - and that (as many of us have
argued) this has been the case since at least 2009.

https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/12/29/court-of-appeal-ruling-will-prevent-uk-museums-from-charging-reproduction-feesat-last

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk