We are talking commercial exploitation here. Not artistic
expression. I doubt the the law is that much different over
there than over here. I you use the picture to show your
personal friends or as fine art there is not much money involved
and no lawyer is going to take the case anyway. Unless you are
trespassing you have the right to take a picture of anything you
like (unless national security is involved) but there may be a
lot of restrictions against using it for anything but a personal
souvenir.
By the way property rights and copyrights are entirely different
things. Copyrights only go back a couple of hundred years,
property rights go back to when people started live close to one
another.
Whole books have been written about photographers rights,
property rights, copyrights, etc. none of them are definitive in
them selves, so no 100 word post is going to cover much more
than the most superficial basics. Most places where the law is
based on Old English Common Law have similar rules, other places
may be very different. For instance, the Chinese don't even
recognize the concept of copyright, a fact that has caused all
kinds of animosity with the rest of the world.
Once again, the right to take a photograph and the right to use
a photograph are very different things.
Doctor Digi wrote:
>
> Not so.
>
> Read:
>
> http://www.barrieglover.demon.co.uk/copyright.html
>
> Under the section "Certain Artistic Works on Public Display" which
> references the 1988 UK copyright act:
>
> "A building which is a work of architecture may be freely photographed and
> that photograph reproduced; however the model for that work of architecture
> can only be photographed if it is permanently situated in a public place or
> in premises open to the public. The architect's drawings for the same
> building may not be photographed without the permission of the architect."
>
> doctor digi
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tom Rittenhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:57 AM
> Subject: Re: UK copyright
>
> > Take a picture of someones house from the public street and sell
> > it to an ad agency who puts it up on billboards all over the
> > country, uses it in a magazine ad campaign, and otherwise
> > indicates there is money involved. The owner will have a hundred
> > lawyers offering to sue you for him for a percentage of the
> > take. I hope you have high limit liability insurance 'cause he
> > is going to win.
> >
>
--
Tom "Graywolf" Rittenhouse
Graywolf Photo, Charlotte, NC, USA
------------------------------------------
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
