[talk-au] Does this mean?.....
inas66+osm at gmail.com
Tue Dec 21 03:04:05 GMT 2010
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.
More information about the Talk-au