Atherton & District Amateur Photographic Society

Photographers who compose a picture in a similar way to an existing image risk copyright infringement, lawyers have warned following the first court ruling of its kind.

Is it just me or does this seem petty and stupid - at one time or another most will have taken a picture that is similar to what someone else has took
seems just a little bit stupid that you could now end up in court.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/ne ... 11191.html

well the 2 images in question are quite similar, I would even say the red bus on the second one (the tea label) looks as though it was added after. Reading between the lines, I think the tea company wanted an image like the first one but didn't want to pay the producer of the original image.

However you are right in saying basically "there is nothing new in photography", and ideas go round and round ad infinitum. Most of us, from time to time, use images we have seen either as inspiration or a starting point for an idea.

This is very unlikely to affect us - in practical terms it would be impossible to prosecute. However, here we seem to have a question of corporate identity and that's a different matter, ripe for litigation. Apple vs Apple was another case, even though music and computers may seem a million miles apart.

It's not so petty when there is 1 million dollars involved like the recent case against Rihanna.

Details http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/ ... wsuit.html

Theo