"The church vestry owns the rights to the building's semblance and architecture. It is a legitimate case of copyright infringement."
Does it? The last major architectural work on the Cathedral was about 150 years ago, so I doubt they have a valid objection on the basis of copyright. The church does have the right to restrict commercial use of the photography etc it permits on premises, but I'm not sure if that is involved here or not.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jg @ Jun 10th 2007 9:47PM
"The church vestry owns the rights to the building's semblance and architecture. It is a legitimate case of copyright infringement."
Does it? The last major architectural work on the Cathedral was about 150 years ago, so I doubt they have a valid objection on the basis of copyright. The church does have the right to restrict commercial use of the photography etc it permits on premises, but I'm not sure if that is involved here or not.