2008/12/9  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> In a message dated 12/8/2008 4:48:56 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> If the  album cover is the key feature of the picture (which it would
> be, since  that's the point of making the picture) then it could well
> be  enough.>>
>
>
> --------------------
> I think it would be a hard case to win to try to suppose what the "intent"
> of the picture taker was.
> Substantially similar means that a typical person would say, "Oh that's the
> same object" in a slightly different form.
>
> A picture of you, holding an album cover, is the same object as a picture  of
> the album cover.  Not in my book.  Me standing in front of the Taj  Mahal is
> not the Taj Mahal.
>
> It would be interesting however if someone were to stand in Times Square  and
> sue everyone who was taking pictures of each other.  Since obviously  their
> *intent* is to violate the copyright of the giant billboards behind  them....

Incidental inclusion. In this case just throwing any images at flickr
would probably be the safest option.



-- 
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply via email to