But judging from that Turner Prize entry, you're in no danger whatever if
you copy and slightly re-interpret pictures you've found in books :-(
TonySleep@halftone.co.uk (Tony Sleep) wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:43:55 +0000 Richard (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> > If I were to take a series of photographs of sculptures around my
> > local town
> > and have them printed them up as postcards to sell, would I have to
> > get
> > permission from either the sculptor or the governing body who
> > commissioned
> > the sculptures in order to do this?
> Yes, you must, at least in UK. Artworks are copyright; a photo is
> regarded as a copy of that artwork. The test is whether the photo is an
> original work in its own right, or merely includes a facsimile of the
> copyright work. In practice, if the sculpture is recognisable you are
> on dangerous ground. Even an editorial portrait of a person
> photographed with part of a painting or sculpture in-frame can be
> regarded as an actionable infringement of copyright.
> Commercial use or not doesn't affect this, it just makes it more likely
> you will be sued for damages (= your profits).
> You may not scan sculptures either ;-)
> Tony Sleep
> http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner
> info & comparisons