Talk:Copyright law of the United Kingdom

Media shifting.

ISTR a case where a user was allowed to make copies of CDs to comapct cassette for the purpose of listening to them in his car. This is important case law, but I have no details. Anyone? Rich Farmbrough 13:37, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Photographs of Paintings

OK - what about Tate Modern posters of a Van Gogh painting in their collection. The painting itself is out of copyright, but they control access to it and sell photographs (slides, postcards, posters). Can I photograph their photographs? They surely can't argue there is any creative artistic element, or indeed much expert labour, in producing an exact facimile photograph? In effect they are extending the copyright term by saying because they own it only they can reproduce it.

81.100.161.66 (talk) 23:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Under UK copyright law, copyright exists in a newly made photograph of an object that is itself out of copyright. There is no requirement for creative input by the photographer. This differs from US copyright law. EEye (talk) 14:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily: see "Are digitised copies of older images protected by copyright?" (page 3) in the Intellectual Property Office advice issued in 2014. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:51, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

"List of links"

External links modified 2 Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Copyright law of the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes: Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230131/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3233/contents/mad to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3233/contents/mad Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230131/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/0018/contents/made to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/0018/contents/made Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230131/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1992/467/contents/made to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1992/467/contents/made Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230130/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1992/1313/contents/made to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1992/1313/contents/made Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230130/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1993/74/contents/made to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/uksi/1993/74/contents/made Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160124230131/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/187contents/made to http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/187contents/made When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024). If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool. If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC) External links modified 2 Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Copyright law of the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes: Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070714083850/http://1911encyclopedia.org/ to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/ Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616200932/http://www.history.ac.uk/resources/digitisation/conf2003/dunning to http://www.history.ac.uk/resources/digitisation/conf2003/dunning When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024). If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool. If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:48, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Updating

Much of the material is very outdated, referring to old statutes and making scant reference to contemporary developments. I have done some re-structuring and made some additions, but without simply removing very large chunks of material, there is not much more I can do. Perhaps the "Framework" section can be used to structure the remainder of the article. I would suggest all removal of information that does not relate to the current law. --Jason246xy (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

It would be better to move such material to an article on the history of the UK copyright law. TJRC (talk) 22:39, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Good idea. I haven't updated below "Qualifications for Protection", so most below that could be moved, with the exception of material dealing with the current legislation (i.e., 1988 Act)--Jason246xy (talk) 19:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)