LawClanger Link: The Photographer of the Westminster Omnibus

[major_clanger]

The Photographer of the Westminster Omnibus

My thoughts on the much-criticised case in which it was held that one Photoshopped picture of a London bus on Westminster Bridge infringed the copyright in another, well-known photo of the same scene. Is the decision as mad as it at first seems, or as wide-ranging in its effects as some have suggested?

Comments

[watervole]

Thanks for a very informative discussion.

[history-monk.livejournal.com]

So, if the decision is against deliberate and effective close imitation, that's reasonable. But I'd be concerned about accidental imitation, or accidentally close imitation.

Accident wasn't practical in the case at point, given that manipulation of some kind was required to achieve the red bus on monochrome background. But it's quite imaginable that it could happen in other cases.

[zotz]

I'm personally not at all convinced by this. The only features of the second image that look similar to me were already appallingly clichéd by then, to the extent of being available as in-camera modes. The earlier picture's quite nicely composed, and the second one clearly hasn't copied that part at all.

[maviscruet.livejournal.com]

So it seems one of the deciding factors was the clear intent to recreate the picture - because it was cheaper then paying what the other person wanted.....