ADavidhazy wrote:
Does copyright then imply that it is the exact same image? How exact
is exact?
I guess the hands and rings wedding shot is not copyrightable either?
Hmmm ...
food for thought. I still think that "appropriations" is squirrely. ;)
The legal questions are complicated (which means I'm not competent to
explain them, among other things). I've read about cases where a very
exact duplicate was staged and shot, and was found to infringe
copyright. I don't find that completely absurd. Exactly where the
boundary is hasn't bee clearly established -- if for no other reason
than because we don't have any way of quantifying the "similarity" of
pictures that consistently agrees with people's ideas of similarity.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
