[Leica] Copyright Alert

[timatherton at theedge.ca (Tim Atherton)]

> > Are you all completely mad?  If you want to be sued by Corbis or Getty
> > images for taking a picture which looks similar to one they have
> > rights for
> > without the defence of "innocent error" then by all means support this.
>
>
> In terms of U.S. law, "copyright" does not apply to ones ability to
> take a picture of something _similar_ (or even somewhat identical) to
> what one has rights to. The "copyright" applies to the copy of the
> actual photograph, or written work, or software etc. _not_ what the
> photograph is "about".

Incorrect

They are known as "derivative" works - where someone basically copies the
"gist" of someone else's copyright work - in this case a photograph. Such
derivative works are an infringement of copyright. It doesn't have to be an
exact copy.

Of course it's like "fair use" the decision of whether there actually is an
infringement depends on the exact wording of the law, previous case law and
the precise circumstance of the case. In the end a court decides where the
line was stepped over and someone has infringed copyright by making a
"derivative" work.

An excellent example is the recent case of photographer Bill Delzell vs RJ
Reynolds - $110,000 settlement for infringement from producing a derivative
image

http://www.pdnonline.com/photodistrictnews/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu
_content_id=1000706663

doesn't show the images there - in my copy of PDN, the two images are very
similar but not identical. The one is (obviously) derived from, the other
though.

tim a