[Foundation-l] Blogs vs. Wikis

geni geniice at gmail.com
Sun Apr 15 19:45:28 UTC 2007

On 4/15/07, Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> wrote:
> 1869 ? I could not find what this case is about, but I wonder what
> relation it would have with modern scanning technology.

It was about photographs of engravings.

"The distinction between an original painting and its copy is well
understood, but it is difficult to say what can be meant by an
original photograph. All photographs are copies of some object, such
as a painting or statue. And it seems to me that a photograph taken
from a picture is an original photograph, in so far that to copy it is
an infringement of the statute."

Of course the judges in Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. rejected
that but that case does not create a precedent under UK law.

> Well, it is obviously a problem, but I think it can be done the other
> way round.
> 1. Publish some documents on which an organisation has a dubious claim.
> 2. Inform the organisation.
> 3. If the organisation doesn't answer, be sure that the issue gets to
> the media.
> If the organisation doesn't sue you, I think it can safely be assumed
> that the claim is not valid.

No it could simply be assumed that the distribution is not hurting
them enough for them to take the risk of losing the case.

Or they sue you, win and bankrupt you with the legal costs. At the
present time the legal risks are such that it is safer to leave such
copying to our American friends.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list