Re:Ask HN: Finding the Australian Aboriginal flag in all art...
by luckylion on Monday August 17, 2020 @02:25PM
(#24190171)
> Also in USA, for instance, copyright is granted for collections, organizations, arrangements or compositions of pre-existing things.
Yes, but you're not copyrighting those pre-existing things in that case, you're copyrighting the collection, organization etc. And if somebody else had done those before, you'll again have a hard time copyrighting it (given that you've copied it).
> Such a photographer can claim copyright on photo of a bridge.
But not of the bridge, which is the pre-existing thing. His photo didn't exist before.
Though photos are, in my opinion (and I'm not a lawyer), one of the really interesting things that I believe make a lot of the issues of our current system of copyright very visible: 100 photographers can stand in the same spot, aim their identical cameras at the same point and make virtually identical photos, and can all, individually, claim copyright on their photo that, if you printed them out and mixed them, they couldn't pick from a line-up.
Yes, but you're not copyrighting those pre-existing things in that case, you're copyrighting the collection, organization etc. And if somebody else had done those before, you'll again have a hard time copyrighting it (given that you've copied it).
> Such a photographer can claim copyright on photo of a bridge.
But not of the bridge, which is the pre-existing thing. His photo didn't exist before.
Though photos are, in my opinion (and I'm not a lawyer), one of the really interesting things that I believe make a lot of the issues of our current system of copyright very visible: 100 photographers can stand in the same spot, aim their identical cameras at the same point and make virtually identical photos, and can all, individually, claim copyright on their photo that, if you printed them out and mixed them, they couldn't pick from a line-up.