[Commons-l] Official paintings held by the U.S. Government

Sun Jun 4 19:16:16 UTC 2006

Jim wrote:
>    1. Determination that the photos lack sufficient originality, thus
>       the photographer can not claim copyright in the photo of a public
>       domain work (following Bridgeman)
>    2. Assuming that there is sufficient originality, so we need to find
>       the copyright status of the photo seperate from the one in the
>       portrait:
>          1. If they are photos posted by the US govt and copied to
>             wikipedia from there - then those are clearly in the public
>             domain as a work of the US govt.
>          2. If the photo was taken by a contributor - then we should
>             refer to his license in uploading the work.
> 
> Personally, my review of the photos in question indicate that they
> clearly fall under the Bridgeman decision and the photographer can not
> claim a copyright in them as there is not the sufficient originality by
> the photographer

The problem is that Bridgman was only a district court case, not a
circuit court case, and it is unclear that the reasoning in Bridgman
will be followed by other courts.  It is not much of a precedent to rely
upon.

--Jimbo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: jwales.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 211 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20060604/88bd3e2d/attachment.vcf 