[WikiEN-l] copyright on old paintings

Sun Aug 24 21:01:00 UTC 2003

See Bridgeman Art Library ltd. v. Corel Corp. SDNY (1999) 36 F. Supp. 2d
191.

You can read the case here:
http://www.constitution.org/1ll/court/fed/bridgman.html
Copyright of photographs of works that are in the public domain are not
original
enough to afford them protection under US copyright law, even when such
works
 might be protected in other countries that afford greater protection than
US law.
I haven't heard of any jurisprudence that has overturned this ruling; as far
as I can
tell it is still generally accepted. Feel free to correct me if anyone has
any other citations.
alex756
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>

> I would be inclined to favour the position that a point and click
> reproduction of a famous out of original copyright painting is not
> copyrightable because it does not add anything original to the painting.
>
> What's the case law on this sort of thing?
>
> Ec