Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/04/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Interesting court ruling
From: jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj)
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 14:10:02 +0530
References: <1B628BC5-7FD5-4F08-85E4-A1091DB4FD57@me.com>

I thought it was standard industry practice to have multiple limited
editions. I collect photographs, and I have noticed this tendency wherever
I have looked.

Another blog about the court ruling:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/03/sobel-vs-eggleston-the-decision.html

A view I agree with and which to me makes terrific sense:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/04/limited-edition-photographs.html

Cheers
Jayanand


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Gerry Walden <gerry.walden at me.com> wrote:

> I found this an interesting ruling on limited edition prints:
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/04/03/judge-eggleston-dispute-collector
>
> Gerry
>
> Gerry Walden
> +44 (0)23 8046 3076 or
> +44 (0)797 287 7932
> www.gwpics.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from gerry.walden at me.com (Gerry Walden) ([Leica] Interesting court ruling)