8 ms·

(I realize that there are a few details that you can use to tell these apart, but,) Who gets to register the copyright on the image?

howenterprisey 3y ago
I'd imagine there are two images so there are two copyrights.
thih9 3y ago
There would be two copyright holders, one for each image. Even if they left the lens caps on and both images were black on black, there would be two distinguishable images with e.g.: different exif data, sensor noise, etc.
throwaway290 3y ago
The scene is not subject to copyright (naturally occurring). If we pretend that camera sensor captures are exactly the same, then I guess it does not belong to a single photographer in this case. But usually no one cares about sensor data, people care about "deliverables", like JPEGs or printed versions, and they will not be the same because everything after sensor capture would be different for each photographer.
- tantalor 3y ago
  What do you mean by "scene"? Like, the state of the world at the time of the photograph? Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"?
  - throwaway290 3y ago
    > What do you mean by "scene"? Photons mostly > Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"? Scene itself is absolutely ""subject to copyright"" in many cases, like when it's set up by photographer or includes recognizable people (they can sue you if you sell a street shot with their face)
  - olalonde 3y ago
    > Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"? Because it is subject to copyright in some countries. In France, for example, photographs of certain buildings cannot be published without the permission of the rights owner.
    - max47 3y ago
      But it’s the building owner who would have the copyright, not whoever was the first person to have it somewhere in the background of a picture
      - throwaway290 3y ago
        The question was whether a scene can be subject to copyright and I answered that question. Whoever downvoted it probably doesn't get basic aspects of photography If I am the photographer and I set up decorations, lights etc. then the scene itself is my creative work. The other guy will have trouble claiming any copyright over his photo of the same scene because it is based on my creative work. Not in this case because the scene is naturally occurring. So we can move on to other things that make the final photo like sensor capture and processing

howenterprisey 3y ago

I'd imagine there are two images so there are two copyrights.

thih9 3y ago

There would be two copyright holders, one for each image. Even if they left the lens caps on and both images were black on black, there would be two distinguishable images with e.g.: different exif data, sensor noise, etc.

throwaway290 3y ago

The scene is not subject to copyright (naturally occurring). If we pretend that camera sensor captures are exactly the same, then I guess it does not belong to a single photographer in this case. But usually no one cares about sensor data, people care about "deliverables", like JPEGs or printed versions, and they will not be the same because everything after sensor capture would be different for each photographer.

tantalor 3y ago
What do you mean by "scene"? Like, the state of the world at the time of the photograph? Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"?
- throwaway290 3y ago
  > What do you mean by "scene"? Photons mostly > Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"? Scene itself is absolutely ""subject to copyright"" in many cases, like when it's set up by photographer or includes recognizable people (they can sue you if you sell a street shot with their face)
- olalonde 3y ago
  > Why would anyone think that was "subject to copyright"? Because it is subject to copyright in some countries. In France, for example, photographs of certain buildings cannot be published without the permission of the rights owner.
  - max47 3y ago
    But it’s the building owner who would have the copyright, not whoever was the first person to have it somewhere in the background of a picture
    - throwaway290 3y ago
      The question was whether a scene can be subject to copyright and I answered that question. Whoever downvoted it probably doesn't get basic aspects of photography If I am the photographer and I set up decorations, lights etc. then the scene itself is my creative work. The other guy will have trouble claiming any copyright over his photo of the same scene because it is based on my creative work. Not in this case because the scene is naturally occurring. So we can move on to other things that make the final photo like sensor capture and processing