Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Are panoramic photos derivative works?

Expand Messages
  • Chris Thomas
    PJ & Listers. I read the article you referenced below. It s clear that various jurisdictions within the US have ruled in different manners. Near the end of the
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      PJ & Listers.

      I read the article you referenced below.
      It's clear that various jurisdictions within the US have ruled in different
      manners.

      Near the end of the article is the following:

      "The Murray Hill rule requires a corresponding registration for each
      discrete work. The cautious practitioner, therefore, should register a
      client's derivative work before pursuing an infringement case that may
      involve any elements of that work"

      This would seen to me to say..... even if you register each component of
      your equirectangular image, you should still copyright the pano. It's
      important to keep in mind that US copyright is only one (although an
      important one) of perhaps 200 national jurisdictions and it is "all over the
      place" on rulings.

      As for myself.... I going with common sense.
      I'll register what I show!
      I have no intention of registering thousands of component parts that will
      never be published as stand alone pieces.

      I'm going to register my equirectangular images as original (discrete)
      works. To use the music analogy....you can't copyright a cord but you can
      copyright a combination of cords that consitute a particular melody.

      Best regards.

      Chris Thomas
      Photographer
      cell... 403-615-1212
      In North America
      call... 1-800-870-5110
      http://www.christhomas.com

      -----Original Message-----
      From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of Perry Joseph
      Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 1:10 AM
      To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Are panoramic photos derivative works?

      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Chris Thomas <chris@...> wrote:

      > Would one not copyright the collage..... rather than it's individual
      parts?

      I agree, however I'm not sure a panoramic would necessarily be
      comparable to a collage in the tradidional sense. And if the collage
      was just a collection of photos without any new material added, I'm
      not so sure it would have to be registered as derivative works if it's
      the same author.

      I refer back to a link I mentioned previously. Part IV would be the
      part I'm specifically looking at:

      http://www.oblon.com/Pub/HudisSullivanCopyrightArticle.html

      Note I'm not saying this brief is a definitive answer, but it has a
      few compelling points and references.

      It's also inferred in the brief there may be differences of
      interpretation depending on the district as previously pointed out by
      Dan G.

      I'm waiting to see if my legal beagle sniffs anything further from his
      resources.

      For the record, I'm not satisfied the question has been answered yet:
      do panoramics need to be registered as derivative works if the
      originals have already been registered?

      In one sense, you might easily argue that if there's doubt and you
      want to be 100% sure you can sue for statutory and attorney fees, then
      you would register a pano as a derivative assuming you previously
      registered the originals.

      pj

      snip.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.