[Leica] Copyright Alert

[jonathan at openhealth.org (Jonathan Borden)]

Karen Nakamura wrote:

>> In terms of U.S. law, "copyright" does not apply to ones ability to 
>> take a picture of something _similar_ (or even somewhat identical) to 
>> what one has rights to. The "copyright" applies to the copy of the 
>> actual photograph, or written work, or software etc. _not_ what the 
>> photograph is "about".
>
> This is not true. Professional photographers have successfully sued 
> studios who, wanting to save money, reduplicated a photographer's 
> setup using a less expensive photographer.

In such cases it is argued that the photographer has copyright on the 
_setup_ as well as the photograph produced and in such cases this may 
be appropriate, just as lyrics to music are copyrighted aside from the 
music itself.

I was assuming that the "copyright" is on the photograph, not the 
subject (we are talking about stock agencies, no?)

What I mean to say, is that although an agency may have right to a 
photograph of, say, a particular lighthouse, this specifically does not 
regulate the right of anyone to take a photograph of the same 
lighthouse --- here I am assuming that the copyright pertains to the 
photograph of the lighthouse and not the lighthouse itself.

That's all, and I assume that the photographers who helped write this 
propsed law would agree. No?

Jonathan