Re: Fine Art Reproductions

On 4/9/99, Steven D. Jamar <sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu> wrote:
>
> My $.02: A faithful reproduction is not original. Period. Ever...

but at the same time acknowledged:

> Can an original work be authored by changing medium from, say, oil paint
> to silk screen reproductions? Surely. And the same could be true for a
> photograph of a painting - or a series of photographs, or mdofications
> to photographs. ...

So I gather that a photograph of a painting is sometimes not "faithful", and in those cases is protectible. But this strikes me as an extremely problematic test. How, I wonder, are you going to instruct the jury on the meaning of "faithful"?

John Noble
<jnoble[_at_]dgsys.com> Received on Fri Apr 09 1999 - 18:45:06 GMT