mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu wrote on 11/27/2006 05:31:09 PM: > The only thing I can think of is that if some pieces are recent > copies, owned by a third party, then the derivatives would be > copyrighted, right?
No. See Bridgeman v. Corel, "which ruled that exact photographic copies of public domain images could not be protected by copyright because the copies lack originality. Even if accurate reproductions require a great deal of skill, experience and effort, the key element for copyrightability under U.S. law is that copyrighted material must show sufficient originality. " The word "photographic" here shouldn't imply that Bridgeman only applies to photographs -- it's generally assumed to include all 2-dimendional artwork. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_Ltd._v._Corel_Corporation -Michael Yunkin Web Content/Metadata Manager UNLV Libraries Las Vegas, NV
