Stephen schrieb:
> I can't quite get my head around how a photograph of a piece of public art can
> be copyrighted. And no I don't mean to open up a discussion ;)

Things would get interesting if some other artist built another 
sculpture right besides it, or inside it, or around it, in a manner that 
the one could not be photographed without the other: Who would then be 
allowed to distribute photographs of the smash?

Or how about architects? Can they forbid photos of their buildings to be 
distributed? How could anyone then distribute photos of any public place 
at all?

(And how does Google go about it? Do they pay royalties for all the 
sculptures they show on Google Maps?)

The US do have some crazy copyright laws.

Post a reply to this message