Re: Mutations and imitations

About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Carl Weese (cweese@earthlink.net)
Date: 08/19/02-07:31:19 AM Z


Galina,

Of course it's a difficult question, but you could start with the legal
definitions of copyright and infringement. An idea cannot be
copyrighted, only the expression of an idea. The expression could be a
book, a poem, a painting, a photograph, etc. The expression has to be tangible.

So you can't copyright a style or a manner, but you can (and
automatically do upon creation) copyright individual works. The
style/manner of a work are part of its expression, but copyright only
takes account of style and manner as expressed in a particular unique work.

 A new work can be declared a copyright infringement if an objective
third party (like a judge) can determine it is based on or derived from
a previous work without the author's permission. The infringing work
need not be identical. There's a precise phrase, something like
"essentially similar" but I just can't remember exactly what it is.
Maybe a lawyer in the group can quote from memory or look it up easily.
There's an international copyright convention that most western
country's laws line up with.

I think a personal evaluation of when the sincerest form of flattery
turns into ripoff is even harder to figure out than the legal issues.

---Carl

Galina Manikova wrote:
>
> There has been a discussion on the list lately which handled not only about
> the technique, but on the content of the pictures.
>
> Which is encouraging me to bring up a touchy subject of imitation or
> plagiarism.
> 


About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:49 AM Z CST