4 ms·
> Sure, but that wasn't done for any of the picture he didn't choose. In which case the following holds: the picture is copyrighted by the individual (a legal
by bluekeybox 15y ago
> Sure, but that wasn't done for any of the picture he didn't choose.
In which case the following holds: the picture is copyrighted by the individual (a legal subject) who pressed the shutter or, in case the button presser is not a legal subject (i.e. an animal), by the owner of the camera, or, in case the work is commissioned on special terms, by the entity who commissioned the work.
- icebraining 15y agoBut is that law? I've never seen the ownership of the camera being used to determine copyright ownership.
- bluekeybox 15y agoI am not a lawyer. However, if law is rational (and I hope to God it is!), it will be codified/applied in a vaguely similar way. In your mind at least, you can equate owning a camera to "paying"/commissioning a work. Many different entities (stock photography websites) take away your copyright in exchange for cash. You can consider the act of giving a non-legal entity a camera as an act of "enabling" (commisioning) photos to be taken on it.