四海人民公摄 - 海外华人摄影爱好者论坛

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
热搜: 活动 交友 discuz
查看: 790|回复: 21

英国人简直是开玩笑嘛!

  [复制链接]
发表于 2012-1-26 06:07:58 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
PHOTOGRAPHERS FACE COPYRIGHT THREAT AFTER SHOCK RULING

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.



UK souvenir maker Temple Island Collection Ltd has won a ruling against New English Teas which it had accused of breaching copyright by using a photo of a London buson its packaging.

Welcoming the news, Temple Island Collection's managing director Justin Fielder – who shot the image in August 2005 and then manipulated it using Photoshop – said: 'As creator of the Red Bus image, and originators of the product concept, we gave New England Teas the opportunity to license with us and work collaboratively, but this was declined.'

The case, heard at the Patents County Court in London on 12 January, could have serious implications for photographers, according to photographic copyright expert Charles Swan, a lawyer at Swan Turton, who said: 'His honour Judge Birss QC decided that a photograph of a red London bus against a black and white background of Big Ben and the Houses of Parliament, with a blank sky, was similar enough to another photograph of the same subject matter to infringe copyright.'

He added: 'The decision is perhaps surprising, given the commonplace subject matter ofthe photographs. The judge himself admitted that he found it a difficult question, but in the end he decided that a substantial part of photograph one [Temple Island's image] had been reproduced in photograph two [New English Teas'].'

Swan warned: 'The Temple Island case is likely to herald more claims of this kind. The judgement should be studied by anyone imitating an existing photograph or commissioning a photograph based on a similar photograph.

'“Inspiration' and “reference” are fine in themselves, but there is a line between copying ideas and copying the original expression of ideas which is often a difficult one to draw.'

Though, in the past, the cost of such court actions has made them 'uneconomic to pursue' this is all about to change, added Swan. 'The UK government has accepted a recommendation in the Hargreaves Report that the Patents County Court… should operate a small claims procedure for intellectual property claims under £5,000.'

Though the images are not identical, the judge ruled that Fielder's composition of the image, to include such features as the 'visual contrast' of the bright red bus and monochrome background, were the photographer's 'intellectual creation'.

Philip Partington, an intellectual property expert at law firm McDaniel & Co, added: 'The action for copyright infringement was the second made by Temple Island Collection against New English Teas.

'Action was first taken in 2010, on discovering a range of products by New English Teas showing a red bus design, which Temple Island Collection and their lawyers felt was a copy of their famous image.'

In a further possible twist, Nicholas Houghton, the owner of New English Teas which is based in Coventry, told Amateur Photographer on 25 January that the legal process was ongoing. 'We can't comment I'm afraid,' he said.

In a follow-up phone call, the firm declined to say whether it plans to appeal the decision and refused to discuss the matter further.


下面是这两张照片:

Fielder.jpg
发表于 2012-1-26 06:29:12 | 显示全部楼层
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 06:31:26 | 显示全部楼层
我们这儿的拿MM很早以前就用过前景彩色背景黑白的主意了,把这双层巴士的片子单独拿出来做专利是有点可笑。 是不是拿MM也应该去分一羹赔偿啊。。。

其实把过去的前景彩色背景黑白的片子多挖出几幅给法官看不就结了? 这Idea都用烂了,哪儿来的专利啊。。。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 08:07:42 | 显示全部楼层
这下我的空中飞人是不是也受到保护,不许模仿了吧?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 08:36:50 | 显示全部楼层
我们这儿的拿MM很早以前就用过前景彩色背景黑白的主意了,把这双层巴士的片子单独拿出来做专利是有点可笑。 ...
Stone 发表于 2012-1-26 06:31


以前的如果没申请专利,拿出来也没用。
侵占专利权与否,与原告是否是发明者无关,仅仅有关于是否是专利权所有者。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 08:57:15 | 显示全部楼层
这下我的空中飞人是不是也受到保护,不许模仿了吧?
澳洲大头 发表于 2012-1-25 16:07


到现在也没讲是怎么做的。。。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 08:59:49 | 显示全部楼层
以前的如果没申请专利,拿出来也没用。
侵占专利权与否,与原告是否是发明者无关,仅仅有关于是否是专利 ...
柞里子 发表于 2012-1-25 16:36


至少可以证明他不是Original Inventor,可以说自己的是Copy前面的想法,不是这个想法。。。
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2012-1-26 09:07:00 | 显示全部楼层
以前的如果没申请专利,拿出来也没用。
侵占专利权与否,与原告是否是发明者无关,仅仅有关于是否是专利 ...
柞里子 发表于 2012-1-26 08:36


人家说的不是专利,是版权。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 09:20:09 | 显示全部楼层
哈哈,这下子拍风景的要麻烦了,同一个景都被无数人拍过咋办?
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 09:45:20 | 显示全部楼层
人家说的不是专利,是版权。
袜贩 发表于 2012-1-26 09:07


其实,版权就是专利权的一种。
都是不让别人翻版复制。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 09:54:04 | 显示全部楼层
至少可以证明他不是Original Inventor,可以说自己的是Copy前面的想法,不是这个想法。。。 ...
Stone 发表于 2012-1-26 08:59



那是另外的官司。
你得先推翻他的版权的合法性。

否则,证明了也没用。
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2012-1-26 10:17:01 | 显示全部楼层
哈哈,这下子拍风景的要麻烦了,同一个景都被无数人拍过咋办?
大家拿 发表于 2012-1-26 09:20


对啊,他姨和糖粒儿都拍过比较雷同的风景,这是她们英国的案例,看她们两个谁先告谁吧。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 14:12:12 | 显示全部楼层
咦,什么时候版权变成专利权的一种啦?啥叫无知者无畏。哈哈哈
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 14:43:21 | 显示全部楼层
咦,什么时候版权变成专利权的一种啦?啥叫无知者无畏。哈哈哈
sth2say 发表于 2012-1-26 14:12



哈哈哈。。。。。你在这等着老柞呢。。。。。。。

专利应该跟版权是两码事。一个要申请,一个有可能自动生效。
回复

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-1-26 14:45:27 | 显示全部楼层
到现在也没讲是怎么做的。。。
Stone 发表于 2012-1-26 08:57



    这不是英国那边风声又紧了嘛,
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|四海人民公摄 - 海外华人摄影爱好者网站

GMT+8, 2024-9-23 18:26

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

Copyright © 2001-2023 Tencent Cloud.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表