On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Anthony <wikim...@inbox.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Upperarm.jpg > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arm.agr.jpg would probably be a > better example. > > There's a good chance that wouldn't be considered copyrightable under US law.
Even if it is, I think an X-ray would be quite different. In taking a photo of a subject's arm, the photographer must consider lighting, angle to which the arm is turned, the proper camera settings, how to find the exact arm that suits the purposes of the intended photo, etc. I think there would be just enough creativity in that arm shot, but it'd be close. An X-ray, on the other hand, is made by a technician according to documented procedures. The arm is turned to the proper angle to see what the doctor wants to see, not to an angle that's aesthetically or artistically pleasing. The image is taken according to standard and inflexible procedures. The technician is not exercising a bit of creativity in taking the image. In fact, the tech would likely get in trouble if (s)he DID decide to "get creative" with it. I wouldn't see how medical X-rays would be any more "creative" or copyrightable than blood test results. -- Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l