On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Rama Neko ramaneko@gmail.com wrote:
Copyright claims from museum and libraries mean absolutely nothing in the general case. Their websites tend to tag copyright claims on everything and anything, including public domain work. One should not take it as these claims have any sort of substance -- nor that they do not: you just can't tell.
How does Bridgeman vs Corel Art. Library (or a comparable case) holds up in this discussion? In the US there is a very clear legal precedent on what to do with photographic reproductions of two-dimensional PD works, but i'm not sure if that is the same in Canada. It differs per country, for example, in Germany it is the same as in the US, in the UK it is completely the opposite and in the Netherlands it's a bit 'in limbo', so to speak.
Seeing that the majority of pictures are photographs, that is probably in our advantage because a photograph is a reproduction in itself. However, there a few drawings in the category.
If that hasn't happened yet, i think it would be very wise to contact Mike Godwin as well about this case.
-- Hay / Husky