Copyright law specifies that a photograph or a scanned copy becomes an original work of art if there's a discernible original creative element present.
Copyright law doesn't define that creative element though. It's entirely subjective. And for good reason because copyright laws are intended to be universally applicable. Another legal principle is the principle of equality when applying a legal framework. A lot of discussion ends up halting in struggles over equal treatment.
This can be avoided in the context of digitization of historical objects though.
When a photographer is contracted or employed, part of the procurement process or the employment contract could include a waiver of photographer copyright.
However, this is a policy choice, not a requirement.
On 26 March 2019, the European Parliament adopted the Copyright in the Digital Market directive. Among all the upheaval about internet freedom, it also contains legal changes that make it more clear for member states on how to deal with cultural heritage in the public domain:
Now, Article 14 sounds like it's banning the practice of acquiring revenue through copies of public domain works. However... it's - again - far more complicated:
Ultimately, the hard part about copyright law is that it tries not to differentiate between specific formats and representations. And so, if copyright law bans the sale of reproductions of public domain works it would also, unintentionally, ban the sale of other reproductions: postcards, printed t-shirts, coffee mugs and so on: it would put a lot of souvenir shops out of business as well.
> Copyright law specifies that a photograph or a scanned copy becomes an original work of art if there's a discernible original creative element present.
This varies from country to country. Thank you for the discussion of Article 14 of the EU CDSM directive!
Copyright law doesn't define that creative element though. It's entirely subjective. And for good reason because copyright laws are intended to be universally applicable. Another legal principle is the principle of equality when applying a legal framework. A lot of discussion ends up halting in struggles over equal treatment.
This can be avoided in the context of digitization of historical objects though.
When a photographer is contracted or employed, part of the procurement process or the employment contract could include a waiver of photographer copyright.
However, this is a policy choice, not a requirement.
On 26 March 2019, the European Parliament adopted the Copyright in the Digital Market directive. Among all the upheaval about internet freedom, it also contains legal changes that make it more clear for member states on how to deal with cultural heritage in the public domain:
https://pro.europeana.eu/post/copyright-reform-passed-by-eur...
Now, Article 14 sounds like it's banning the practice of acquiring revenue through copies of public domain works. However... it's - again - far more complicated:
http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2019/06/27/the-new-copy...
Ultimately, the hard part about copyright law is that it tries not to differentiate between specific formats and representations. And so, if copyright law bans the sale of reproductions of public domain works it would also, unintentionally, ban the sale of other reproductions: postcards, printed t-shirts, coffee mugs and so on: it would put a lot of souvenir shops out of business as well.