Sabrina Kilian schrieb:
> I didn't mean to imply that they did have copyright on the artwork, just
> that some have tried to claim that they did. There was a museum or
> gallery that sued a publisher for including prints of rather famous
> paintings, where the originals of those paintings was in the museum or
> gallery. The argument was that the paintings were in their possession,
> and that taking pictures without their consent on a 'no cameras allowed'
> property either gave them copyright over the pictures or made it illegal
> to print them, both of which are rather silly claims.

I guess they still sued for violating their "house rules", to get at 
least /something/ out of it.

Post a reply to this message