[photo-3d] copyright or copy-wrong?

["Hans A.J. Middendorp" <ajhans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Copy-right or copy-wrong: I've heard stories how you Americans have nearly
all gone copyright crazy. Fopr instance, trying to patent changes in nature
(genetically modified organisms, and all that)! (yes I know that there are
high research costs, no need to mention it to the list). Anyway, back to
stereo: George brings up again the fact that he projected some of the
stereo-conversions from the 3D Museumbook. Apparently, someone earlier on
had mentioned that this was against copyright law.

I am not a lawyer, I teach poor people in Bangladesh how to become rich
(better said: less poor). Lawyers in the States, as I understood it, make
rich people poor (or only less rich, from the Bangladesh perspective!).

But I cant appreciate/understand why somebody,  who converted a work of art
of somebody else (in the public domain or not), and probably with the help
of software he did not create himself (asuming that it is a he), can claim
copyright over these things.

As my father used to say, nothing's better for long discussions than
subjects you don't know anything about at all. And he was right!

Finally a suggestion: If copylaws are _really_ so strict in the USA that
stereo showings wont be possible anymore at the NSA conventions, then why
not plan for a NSA convention outside the US? Say, Amsterdam? Copenhagen?
Cuba? That would be fun!

Hans (not serious)
-

>   Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 22:27:43 -0400
>  From: "Dr. George A. Themelis" <drt-3d@xxxxxxx>
>Subject: Clarifications on my violation of Federal copyright laws, etc.

>I have copied images from the Museum 3D book (my own copy)
>which consists of pairs of flat paintings and then the
>same paintings converted to stereo.  I have projected