3 ms·
Correct on the theory but wrong on the answer. There is no distinguishing, but copyright only subsists in creative works, not non-creative works. As a result,
by DannyBee 4y ago
Correct on the theory but wrong on the answer.
There is no distinguishing, but copyright only subsists in creative works, not non-creative works.
As a result, in the US, the copyright office won't register copyright in medical images produced through most processes (registration is a pre-requisite to suing)
As per Compendium: Chapter 300 by the US Copyright Office, "the Office will not register works produced by a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author." including "Medical imaging produced by x-rays, ultrasounds, magnetic resonance imaging, or other diagnostic equipment."
- YPPH 4y ago>registration is a pre-requisite to suing If this is so, could you approach the court if you disagree with their interpretation? I'd be surprised if the Copyright Office was the be all and end all of whether copyright subsists in a particular subject-matter.