> difference if the owner was adverse to having that done, in this case two > thing, first I know the owner and he has a copy hanging in the Mill which is > a bed and breakfast now, and secondly this is an historic building which I > believe would set a precedence to such photos. Terry All this copyrighting buildings nonsense would be nonsense if it didn't have an element of truth in it. Now where in this darned world would you guess the legal system would allow someone to "copyright" a building to the extent that no one can take a shot of it? Mmm. As to an old historic building, as long as it's not owned by Disney and the original designer died more than 70-y ago chances are it's copyright free anyway However, if the current owner has painted the outside he (or the contractor who applied the paint) almost certainly owns copyright on that :o) Bob
