Bizarre Copyright Ruling In the UK

[ddutchison]

A judge has ruled that one photograph which is merely similar to another can infringe on that other pictures copyright.

Article here: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/photographers_face_copyright_threat_after_shock_ru ling__news_311191.html

[Rob-F]

Since the pictures were for the purpose of product advertisement, I can see how there is an issue of theft of intellectual property. I doubt there would be a problem if the photos were only to be used or sold as photos, though, and not as commercial ads. But I'm no lawyer . . .:angel:

[jesse1dog]

Before coming to any conclusions about this it's worth reading the full judgement. I don't think 'bizarre' is particularly apt in the circumstances.

jesse

[MickH]

There's a brief discussion on this topic here:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115176

[Roger Hicks]

Odd, though, that is is presented as copyright rather than 'passing off'.

Cheers,

R.

[skibeerr]

In Belgium we are waiting for the verdict where an ad bureau took/stole a Top 10 song changed some notes and arrangement and used it in an ad.

Ad bureaus are not afraid to take a shortcut and save some$$$

You can compare yourself, http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=9Q3ASG01