3 ms·

What if (as it appears to be in this case) the second photographer intentionally used your photograph as a template for his own, copying it to the extent that a

by Luc 15y ago

What if (as it appears to be in this case) the second photographer intentionally used your photograph as a template for his own, copying it to the extent that a casual observer would not notice that they are different, putting in the effort to make it as much as possible like yours? There's many more similarities in those pictures - e.g. it's the same location, the same iconic background buildings, the same shade of red and the detail of the sky has been removed in both. I don't think the judge would have ruled this way if it had been a coincidence that the photos are alike.

FlemishBeeCycle 15y ago
And what if you both sit in a life drawing class drawing the same model? What if for some odd reason you decide to sit behind one of the participants and draw a portrait based off their drawing? I certainly understand what you're getting at, but everything that we do today is based off of some idea that came before us. Is a certain level of indirection required for an expression to be considered appropriately unique? From the article, "..there is a line between copying ideas and copying the original expression of ideas...", I would consider that opinion to be both myopic and absurd. We stand on the shoulders of giants - nothing created today can ever be considered to be truly "original".
- Luc 15y ago
  > From the article, "..there is a line between copying ideas and copying the original expression of ideas...", I would consider that opinion to be both myopic and absurd. Society needs to draw that line somewhere, to balance the free dissemination of culture and the possibility to make a living off creative works. As long as you are living in a democracy that needs to balance different opinions and make compromises, you'll never be able to get rid of this (unless you simply ignore the law, of course).
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
wlesieutre 15y ago
I understand it's popular at Yosemite to try to replicate Ansel Adams' famous photos. Can his estate claim ownership of all of those photos? It seems like a dangerous precedent to me.

by Luc 15y ago

FlemishBeeCycle 15y ago

And what if you both sit in a life drawing class drawing the same model? What if for some odd reason you decide to sit behind one of the participants and draw a portrait based off their drawing? I certainly understand what you're getting at, but everything that we do today is based off of some idea that came before us. Is a certain level of indirection required for an expression to be considered appropriately unique? From the article, "..there is a line between copying ideas and copying the original expression of ideas...", I would consider that opinion to be both myopic and absurd. We stand on the shoulders of giants - nothing created today can ever be considered to be truly "original".

Luc 15y ago
> From the article, "..there is a line between copying ideas and copying the original expression of ideas...", I would consider that opinion to be both myopic and absurd. Society needs to draw that line somewhere, to balance the free dissemination of culture and the possibility to make a living off creative works. As long as you are living in a democracy that needs to balance different opinions and make compromises, you'll never be able to get rid of this (unless you simply ignore the law, of course).
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

wlesieutre 15y ago

I understand it's popular at Yosemite to try to replicate Ansel Adams' famous photos. Can his estate claim ownership of all of those photos? It seems like a dangerous precedent to me.