[Foundation-l] Dead Sea Scrolls

[Nikola Smolenski]

On 28/09/11 13:44, Anthony wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Nikola Smolenski<smolensk at eunet.rs>  wrote:
>> The photograph does not constitute an origin or beginning.
>
> Sure it does.  Is there any such thing as an "original photograph"?

Yes there is, and this isn't it.

>> The photograph is not the first instance.
>
> The original photograph is the first instance of the photograph.  This

Copyright does not protect physical objects. The image that is fixed on 
the first instance of the physical photograph is not the first instance 
of the image.

>> The photograph is not independent or creative.
>
> Someone most likely selected the F-stop, the shutter speed, and the
> lighting.  I doubt they just pointed the camera on auto and used the

The fact that you can devise a creative method to create an image does 
not mean that the image itself is creative. As an extreme example, I can 
devise an extremely creative false backstory for me in order to gain 
access to a document, then photocopy it. The fact that I was creative 
while devising my story does not give me copyright to a photocopy.

> built in flash.  Someone most likely selected how to convert the raw
> image into a jpeg or png or whatever they're using.  They may have

How the hell is that creative?

> even done some significant post-processing.  Someone definitely

Post-processing could be creative, but the original photographs still 
are not.

> selected which camera to use, how many separate photographs to tile

This must be the worst pro-copyright argument of all times. So I have 
two copiers in my company, and since I selected one of them the 
photocopies I made are *original* and copyrighted by me? They are not.

> together, etc.

This choice is limited by technical possibilities of the devices and not 
by someone's creative decision.