|
I've seen people getting in an uproar over all over the place for a few days now. My question is this: How is this really any different than a PD book being published by Penguin or Random House? The material contained in the book is PD, but that particular manifestation of it is copyrighted (the presentation and specific formatting).
Images are the same way. It's not like they magically made themselves appear in a photograph (or jpg). A photographer had to spend some time ensuring the conditions were just right to get a good picture of the work (which isn't exactly simple because classic artwork can be very reactive to light--hence the 'no flash photography' rules in most museums). In that instance, like the book, the material contained within the image is PD, but the image itself is copyrighted.
|