‏‏RE: Photographing purchased objects

["Amalyah Keshet [akeshet@xxxxxxxxxx]" <akeshet@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Indeed, I think we're missing the real question, which I suggest Karen clarify
for us. Originally she wrote:

"I have an Anatomy instructor who has created digital handouts for her
students
  comprised of photographs of bones along with her additional narrative of
what
  each part of the bone is called. The 3-D models of the various bones that
were  photographed were purchased from various companies and there is no
identifying mark on any of them."

The instructor created "digital handouts" - which are...?
Whose photographs of bones are being used?
Is the "narrative" audio or text?
What 3-D models?  Physical models, or computer-modeling?
The 3-D models were "purchased from various companies." With licenses?

Probably best to know what the question is, before trying to answer!

Amalyah Keshet

________________________________________
~~n`z: chollan3@xxxxxxx [chollan3@xxxxxxx]
~~pylg: ~~iem ypi 14 cvnax 2009 20:02
~~rezw licird: Karen Kunz; digital-copyright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
~~pey`: Re: Photographing purchased objects

I think we're missing the real question Karen asked, which is whether
the instructor cum photographer can sell her photos of the 3-D models
(part or all) to the public. I agree that there is some question as to
whether the models are copyrightable because there is no "originality"
or creativity involved in simply making a cast of a bone (anatomy is
fact-based). Conservatively speaking, if one considers the models to be
copyrighted, is it "legal" for the instructor to commercialize a
derivative work of someone else's models? As has been mentioned, the
copyright policy of the instructor's school should be taken into account
but equally important is the risk factor. The instructor has to weigh
the risk s/he is willing to take and make that decision, or cut to the
chase and simply ask the model manufacturer for permission to sell the
derivative.

Claudia Holland


Bryan M. Carson wrote:
> Hi, Karen,
>
> My take on the situation is the same as yours. Since the bones are not
> writing they are not subject to copyright. There could be trademark
> issues with some items, but the bones in the body are generic (both in
> the general and the legal sense of the word). It also sounds like there
> are no patent issues to worry about. As long as no trademark is showing,
> it should be permissible to photograph the bones.
>
> Bryan M. Carson
>
>

[***** removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a name of
chollan3.vcf]