On 1/25/2012 1:07 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
If you haven't seen it in DPReview:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/25/Imitated_Image_Copyright_Case
It's about a rather interesting, albeit controversial decision..
Igor
I didn't read the ruling but from the synopsis, the second photograph is
an infringement due to intent? Hell the composition is different, the
elements are there but in a different arrangement. This is like me
saying I took a photograph of apples in a bowl, therefor anyone who
takes photos of apples in a bowl no matter how different from my
composition owes me royalties. The judge should be defrocked, and then
defenestrated.
--
Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a
lengthily search.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
