2009/7/11 Gregory Maxwell <[email protected]>: >>> This is where in the US, Bridgeman v Corel established that a >>> "slavish" reproduction of a PD work does not constitute a new work >>> that can be protected by copyright. >> >> We know that isn't the case under UK law, the question is whether the >> photographs involved substantial investment of resources. > > No we don't. The specific matter at hand has never been in front of a > court. It's just not clear cut, but it wasn't in the US prior to > bridgeman either.
I don't know if there is precise precedent, but from what I've read I think most people agree that "sweat of the brow" is, at least in some cases, enough under UK law. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
