How can the Bettmann Archive possibly work (or be legal) ?

I don't imagine that the Bettman Archive did or will continue to make money on ancient art based on copyright. Instead, I assume that they make their money on both the legwork they provide (as was previously mentioned) and on the scarcity of the material they own. (e.g., there is only one copy of a particular work, bettman owns it and if you ever want to use their archive again you avoid using that picture more than once or using that picture after it has appeared in another publication.)

I wonder, however, whether the copyright which may subsist in pictures of public domain art is sufficiently substantial that one would be forced to use a 1920 photograph rather than a 1995 photograph of the work. Obviously there is a very low creativity standard for copyright, but given Sega v. Accolade, is it clear that every copyrighted photograph of public domain art is usefully protected?

-Shai Stahl
ss68855[_at_]lawmail.law.columbia.edu Received on Fri Oct 20 1995 - 17:57:04 GMT