Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
A copy of a book is a book; a photograph of a Dalek is not a Dalek. The BBC certainly have the right to license who can build Daleks, but they don't have the right to say to someone who perfectly legally owns a Dalek, "you can't take a photograph of it and use the photograph for non-commercial purposes."
|
A copy of a page in a book is not the book, but we still have to obey the copyright rules on the forum and from what I've seen we are not allowed to show how out devices display text from a book under copyright, even if it's just one page.
You also didn't pay attention to what murraypaul said in post #54:
Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
To break this thread further:
http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/ip_photography.htm
Quote:
|
Advertising, fashion, interior design and lifestyle photographers frequently include paintings, sculptures, craft items, architectural works, jewelry, clothing, toys or other artistic works in their photographs. Often, such items are protected by copyright. Only the owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to reproduce the copyright work. Photographing a copyright work amounts to reproducing it. Therefore, before you take a photo of any copyright work, you need the prior permission of the copyright owner. Photographers who infringe a copyright may be required to compensate for the economic loss, that is, to pay the damages they have caused and sometimes also other expenses, such as legal costs.
|
[...]
So that there is at least an argument that you have in fact (completely unknowingly) infringed on the BBC's copyright by transmitting a photograph of their copyrighted object to the public. |
You don't have the right to take a photograph of the Dalek that you purchased without BBC's permission. The law isn't even slightly ambiguous about this.