[Foundation-l] At least 500 images will have to be deleted from the National Portrait Gallery

[Henning Schlottmann]

Michael Maggs wrote:
> The problem in the UK is that - contrary to what Klaus said - there is 
> now a binding Court of Appeal judgement (Hyperion Records v Sawkin) 
> which makes it very clear that the Bridgeman principle will _not _stand 
> up in a UK court.  You can find details of the UK case law at [[Commons 
> talk:When to use the PD-Art tag#Reply to call for revision 
> <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag#Reply_to_call_for_revision> 
> ]].

I strongly deny that Sawkins v Hyperion Records Ltd is by any means 
authoritative to the question of reproductions of 2D works of art. The 
infringed creative rework in that case were so vastly greater than a 
mere reproduction, that I can't believe you even bring it up in our 
context.

The question of originality in the reproduction of 2D images under UK 
law is quoting Michalos (see 
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:When_to_use_the_PD-Art_tag) 
  "presently an open question in English law." On that page I pointed 
out, why I believe we should stand on the side of freedom and public 
domain and cite a UK legal scholar who thinks so as well and has strong 
arguments.

Ciao Henning