←back to thread

Secret 3D scans in the French Supreme Court

(cosmowenman.substack.com)
771 points abetusk | 5 comments | 18 Oct 24 08:50 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Jyaif ◴[18 Oct 24 11:31 UTC] No.41878393[source]▶
> in private, RMN admits it won’t release its scans because it wants to protect its gift shops’ sales revenue from competition from the public making their own replicas.

Sounds like a pretty good reason

replies(4): >>41878476 #>>41878523 #>>41878741 #>>41878777 #
1. frereubu ◴[18 Oct 24 11:46 UTC] No.41878476[source]▶
Understandable perhaps, "good" enough to completely ignore copyright law, no.
replies(1): >>41878567 #
2. thaumasiotes ◴[18 Oct 24 11:59 UTC] No.41878567[source]▶
What copyright law? If I possess an out-of-copyright document, nothing requires me to make a copy for you when you ask me.

They're ignoring the French freedom-of-information law; copyright law doesn't even touch the issue.

replies(1): >>41878744 #
3. frereubu ◴[18 Oct 24 12:23 UTC] No.41878744[source]▶
My point, perhaps badly made, was that copyright law has expired, therefore it should be in the public domain.
replies(1): >>41880035 #
4. immibis ◴[18 Oct 24 14:59 UTC] No.41880035{3}[source]▶
Being in the public domain doesn't mean someone has to give you a copy.
replies(1): >>41880100 #
5. kelseyfrog ◴[18 Oct 24 15:06 UTC] No.41880100{4}[source]▶
No, that's why the author is using freedom of information laws to accomplish his goals. If you are a government institution - and these museums are - in a country with freedom of information laws, then it follows that you can be compelled to comply with them by the courts.