| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Topic : "(Certain) digital models ruled not subject to copyright" |
Affected
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Oct 1999
Posts: 1854
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:49 am |
 |
 |
http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_9630368
Of course, it's a single case in the USA, but interesting anyway. I can see where they're coming from, in a way, since copyright is meant for original works, and copying a car 1:1 is not exactly creating any new designs. Then again, I can also see a lot of difficult borderline cases rising from this decision, and the thought of courts deciding what is or isn't sufficiently original art is quite scary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
sweetums
member
Member #
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 236
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:58 am |
|
|
Like what?
Name some examples where you think this might cause "scary" decisions.
The word "original," while a bit broad in definition, is still pretty solid for legal decisions.
A copy is a copy is a copy. No original to it.
_________________
Life is short. Expect nothing, enjoy everything.
That which does not kill you should make you wiser... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drew
member
Member #
Joined: 14 Jan 2002
Posts: 495
Location: Atlanta, GA, US
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:34 am |
|
|
| Affected wrote: |
| and the thought of courts deciding what is or isn't sufficiently original art is quite scary. |
It's a legal issue. Who else would decide? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
