28 ms·

You've raised a good point in relation to school portraits. Perhaps creative effort is a result of direction from the photographer (smile?).

• ISL 4y ago
  Lighting, focus, posing, etc. matters too for school portraits -- my actual point is that, from a photographer's perspective, medical imaging seems like it would fall under copyright, too. There is direction and configuration that goes into arranging the patient, correctly operating the imaging system, and interpreting the results to verify that the medical-imaging needs are met. I'm surprised to hear that medical imaging is handled differently by the Copyright Office. Instagram's most popular images are frequently formulaic -- is that not a mechanical process, too?
  • YPPH 4y ago
    I guess we will only know when a court determines the issue. I am having a great deal of difficulty seeing how an X-ray differs from ordinary photography where the shot is pre-set but nevertheless subject to some human decision-making. It's just different photographic technology that enables transparency. I was under the understanding the creativity requirement was very low, and that simply the choice of the area to X-ray would suffice. Clearly, the Copyright Office disagrees with that assesment.
  • littlestymaar 4y ago
    Nobody said it doesn't require any work, but the question is whether the said work is a creative process. School photographs would likely be given the benefit of the doubt, because most of their non-school pictures are creative work, but thr same cannot be said for dentists…