[talk-au] Does this mean?.....

[Ian Sergeant]

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Nick Hocking <nick.hocking at gmail.com> wrote:

> Since taking a photo of something entails little or no "independent
> intellectual effort",

On 21 December 2010 13:08, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

> In what context? Obviously artistic photography is copyrightable.

And even non-artistic photography...

However, this case draws a real distinction between the human process
of originality, and an automated process according to a set of rules.

I've no doubt that if I take a photo out of an aeroplane window that
copyright subsists in that photo.  However, it would be interesting to
see what the courts would now make of a satellite taking photos
automatically according to a standard process of the earths surface.

Ian.