If you are active in Flickr, you will definitely come across talented young girl who creates outstanding photographs, Rosie Hardy. Till one day, someone posted a discussion on how she copies other artists from Deviantart. So now, she had received notice on how her words can have a lawsuit against her.
A blog has been set up to provide evidence of such "copyright infringement".
I digged up some old thread, this one is posted by kandinsky.
If the statement above is legit, she hasn't done anything wrong , has she?What is Not Protected by Copyright?
Subject matter not protected by copyright include:
* ideas (e.g. a new business idea that has not been documented);
* concepts (e.g. an idea for a new game show that has not been written down);
* discoveries (e.g. a research finding that has not been known before);
* procedures (e.g. the steps involved when applying for a travel visa);
* methods (e.g. the unique solution to a mathematical problem);
* subject matter that has not been made tangible in a recording or writing (e.g. a speech or a dance that has not been written or recorded); and
* subject matter which is not of original authorship (e.g. works which contain information in the public domain such as standards and the like).
I perceive the works she posted as a mere emulation. There's no law/rule that says you have to credit an artist that inspires you.It is not wrong in attempting to reproduce other works in an effort to understand the process.
If this is copying, then we should restrict works for only the first. The first guy who shoots a sunrise at Changi, the first one who shoots a Persian cat on top of a couch. The first one who captures a girl on top of a hill with red balloons, no? Since everything else which arrives later is copying their concept.
Spill your thoughts , please.