[WikiEN-l] Painting copyright

[Fred Bauder]

Ordinary pictures of out of copyright paintings remain in the public domain,
after all, a photograph is just a copy. The usual issue arises when you
attempt to photograph the picture itself while it is in a venue controled by
its owner or licensee who may attempt to impose restrictions on what you may
do while you are in the space.

Fred

> From: Robin Shannon <robin.shannon at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Robin Shannon <robin.shannon at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 19:39:31 +1100
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Painting copyright
> 
> The copyright on the paintings of the great masters are obviously all
> well out of date, however, does this mean that straight photos of
> these are uncopyrightable? Or are they like translations of the
> classics which are copyrightable. It just seems that not enough has
> been down by taking a photo (or photocopying or scanning or however
> the hell it is that art galleries make thier pictures of paintings) to
> really justify calling it a new work in its own right.
> 
> Anyone know the answer? Even any unqualified people want to take a
> stab at guessing the answer?
> 
> Also if they are copyrightable, does anyone know of any place where
> there are PD/open license pics of the works of the great masters?
> 
> Paz, amor y Papá Noel,
> rjs,
> [[User:The bellman]]
> 
> -- 
> hit me: robin.shannon.id.au
> jab me: saudade at jabber.zim.net.au
> 
> This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
> Recombo Plus License. To view a copy of this license, visit
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l