Re: R.M.S. Titanic

On Fri, 27 Mar 1998, Robert Panzer <bigbusie[_at_]aol.com> wrote:
>
> On 98-03-26, Terry Carroll <carroll[_at_]tjc.com> wrote:
> >
> > I suspect that the case is not so much with regard to an intellectual
> > property right as it is to physical access; i.e., RMST's "exclusive
> > right to photograph Titanic" may be akin to a museum's exclusive right
> > to photograph its holdings.
>
> What statute or case law says a museum (particularly a public one, as
> most probably are) has exclusive rights to photograph its holdings??

I'm not aware of any such statute or case law. That's why I wrote "I suspect that the case is not so much with regard to an intellectual property right as it is to physical access."

--
Terry Carroll       |  "I know the Great Lakes.  I've traveled the 
Santa Clara, CA     |  Great Lakes.  And Lake Champlain is not one of
carroll[_at_]tjc.com     |  the Great Lakes." - U.S. Senator John Glenn reacts
Modell delendus est |  to 33 U.S.C. 1122 as amended by Pub.L. 105-160