80-467: In the context of a copyright discussion, Bridgeman refers to Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. Bridgeman often refers to the Bridgeman Art Library . Bridgeman is also a surname [see also Bridgman ], and may refer to the following people: Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. , 36 F. Supp. 2d 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), was a decision by
160-441: A 1959 case, Alva Studios, Inc. v. Winninger , 177 F. Supp. 265 (S.D.N.Y. 1959), in which the district court enforced a copyright claimed on a reproduction sculpture of Rodin's Hand of God. The Meshwerks decision, however, specifically overturned that case: "We are not convinced that the single case to which we are pointed where copyright was awarded for a 'slavish copy' remains good law." The appeals court ruling cited and followed
240-657: A collection of arms and armour and medieval and Renaissance objects including Limoges enamels , maiolica , glass and bronzes. Paintings, furniture and porcelain are displayed together in the manner of private collections of the 19th century. The 16th- and 17th-century Hertford House was the London townhouse of Edward Seymour, 1st Earl of Hertford (1539–1621) and was in a different location: Cannon Row in Westminster. His father Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset (executed 1552), brother of Queen Jane Seymour , had started building
320-488: A few English and German pieces. The collection ranges from cabinet furniture, much of which is veneered with brass and turtleshell marquetry (commonly known as "Boulle" marquetry) or with wood marquetry, to seat furniture, clocks and barometers, gilt-bronze items including mounted porcelain and hardstones, mantelpieces, mirrors, boxes and pedestals. One highlight of the collection is the major collection of furniture attributed to André-Charles Boulle (1642–1732), perhaps
400-486: A journalist in verbatim reporting of a speech and the skills exercised by a photographer in exactly reproducing a work of art. However, Antiquesportfolio.com v Rodney Fitch & Co. also held that a slavish copy, such as re-using a photographic negative , re-photographing a print, or re-creating the effect of an earlier photograph, would not constitute an original work. Similarly, Lord Oliver's dicta in Interlego held that
480-510: A large number of extravagantly decorated 16th- and early-17th-century wheel-lock firearms, together with an impressive group of magnificent civilian flint-lock guns of the Napoleonic era. Several of the weapons here were made for European rulers, including Louis XIII and Louis XIV of France and Tsar Nicholas I of Russia. It is a major collection of early firearms in the United Kingdom. This space
560-532: A more detailed statement of the court's reasoning than the first judgment did. The court held that photographs were "writings" within the meaning of the Copyright Clause. It cited Melville Nimmer 's Nimmer on Copyright , which stated that there "appear to be at least two situations in which a photograph should be denied copyright for lack of originality". Kaplan considered one of those situations, as described by Nimmer, to be directly relevant, namely that "where
640-477: A new copyright when making a faithful reproduction of a 2D artwork by photography or scanning, but it is doubtful that the law supports this". They argued that the fees inhibit the dissemination of knowledge, the very purpose of public museums and galleries, and so "pose a serious threat to art history". They therefore advised the UK's national museums "to follow the example of a growing number of international museums (such as
720-601: A photograph of a photograph or other printed matter is made that amounts to nothing more than slavish copying". A slavish photographic copy of a painting thus, according to Nimmer, lacks originality and thus copyrightability under the US Copyright Act. Kaplan stated that there is "little doubt that many photographs, probably the overwhelming majority, reflect at least the modest amount of originality required for copyright protection", citing prior judgments that had stated that "[e]lements of originality [...] may include posing
800-535: A photograph of the Laughing Cavalier . It asserted that the certificate demonstrated the subsistence of copyright. It further argued that the court had mis-applied UK copyright law, by not following Graves' Case . The court also received an unsolicited letter from William F. Patry , who argued that the court had been incorrect to apply UK law at all. The plaintiff moved for the court to receive an amicus curiae brief from The Wallace Collection , addressing
880-552: A smoking room lined with Minton tiles in Turkish style. Under the architect Thomas Ambler a new front portico was added in the form of a porte-cochère , with large Doric pilasters, storeys were added to both wings and the stables and coach house were converted to galleries by the addition of top-lit roofs. The whole building was given a red brick facade and the windows were altered. Wallace bequeathed all his assets to his wife, who in turn and most probably according to his wishes, bequeathed
SECTION 10
#1732851313182960-476: A summary dismissal of the suit. The court applied UK law to determine whether the plaintiff's photographs were copyrightable in the first place, and applied US law to determine whether copyright had been infringed. It determined that Bridgeman's photographs were not original works, and could not be validly copyrighted under UK law. It further determined that even if the photographs were copyrightable, no infringement could be deemed to have occurred under US law, because
1040-477: Is known for its 18th-century French paintings, Sèvres porcelain and French furniture but also displays other objects, such as arms and armour featuring both European and Oriental objects, as well as displays of gold boxes, miniatures, sculpture and medieval and Renaissance works of art such as maiolica , glass, bronzes and Limoges enamels . The works of art in the Collection comprise: The Wallace Collection
1120-460: Is not binding upon UK courts. However, because it follows dicta in Interlego , and cites Justice Laddie , it serves to raise doubt in UK law as to the originality of photographs that exactly replicate other works of art. An additional problem with taking the case as precedent would be reconciling it with the decision in Walter v Lane , given that an analogy can be made between the skills exercised by
1200-591: Is originality. Corel Corporation sold a CD-ROM called "Professional Photos CD Rom masters" in the UK, the US, and Canada which contained digitized images of paintings by European masters. Corel stated that it had obtained these images from a company called "Off the Wall Images", a company that no longer existed. Bridgeman Art Library possessed a large library of photographs of paintings by European masters, as both transparencies and in digital form. The copyright terms on
1280-658: Is simply to make a faithful reproduction of an existing work. In November 2017, 27 prominent art historians, museum curators and critics (including Bendor Grosvenor , Waldemar Januszczak , Martin Kemp , Janina Ramirez , Robin Simon , David Solkin , Hugh Belsey , Sir Nicholas Goodison , and Malcolm Rogers ) wrote to The Times newspaper to urge that "fees charged by the UK's national museums to reproduce images of historic paintings, prints and drawings are unjustified, and should be abolished". They commented that "[m]useums claim they create
1360-503: Is split into six curatorial departments: Pictures and Miniatures; Ceramics and Glass; Sculpture and Works of Art; Arms and Armour; Sèvres porcelain; and Gold Boxes and Furniture. The Wallace Collection's Old Master paintings are some of the most prominent in the world, and date from the 14th to the mid-19th centuries. The highlights include Dutch and Flemish paintings of the 17th century, 18th- and 19th-century French paintings, and works by English, Italian and Spanish artists. Strengths of
1440-472: Is uncontested that Bridgeman's images are substantially exact reproductions of public domain works, albeit in a different medium". Although the second judgment was based upon application of US law, Kaplan added that "[w]hile the Court's conclusion as to the law governing copyrightability renders the point moot, the Court is persuaded that plaintiff's copyright claim would fail even if the governing law were that of
1520-501: The Intellectual Property Office of the United Kingdom issued an official guide for individuals and businesses titled "Copyright Notice: digital images, photographs and the internet" that offers a judgment similar to that of Bridgeman v. Corel . Updated 4 January 2021, the section of the guidance titled, "Are digitised copies of older images protected by copyright?" states that: However, according to established case law,
1600-646: The Royal Collection , Waddesdon Manor , the collections of the Duke of Buccleuch , the Getty Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art as one of the greatest and most celebrated in the world. Totalling more than five hundred pieces, the collection consists largely of 18th-century French furniture but also includes some significant pieces of 19th-century French furniture, as well as interesting Italian furniture and
1680-597: The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York , which ruled that exact photographic copies of public domain images could not be protected by copyright in the United States because the copies lack originality . Even though accurate reproductions might require a great deal of skill, experience, and effort, the key element to determine whether a work is copyrightable under US law
SECTION 20
#17328513131821760-871: The United States Supreme Court decision in Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service (1991), explicitly rejecting difficulty of labor or expense as a consideration in copyrightability. This line of reasoning has been followed in other cases, such as Eastern America Trio Products v. Tang Electronic Corp , 54 USPQ2d 1776, 1791 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), where it was ruled that "[t]here is a very broad scope for copyright in photographs, encompassing almost any photograph that reflects more than 'slavish copying'." The Bridgeman case has caused great concern among some museums, many of which receive income from licensing photographic reproductions of objects and works in their collections. Some of them have argued, as above, that
1840-515: The 15th to the 19th centuries with important holdings of French 18th-century paintings, furniture, arms and armour, porcelain and Old Master paintings arranged into 25 galleries. It is open to the public and entry is free. It was established in 1897 from the private collection mainly created by Richard Seymour-Conway, 4th Marquess of Hertford (1800–1870), who left both it and the house to his illegitimate son Sir Richard Wallace (1818–1890), whose widow Julie Amelie Charlotte Castelnau bequeathed
1920-459: The Front State Room, then, as now, hung with portraits. Some of the modern furniture seen in the room in 1890 is no longer in the collection, but the mounted porcelain displayed on the cabinets and the chandelier , made by Jean-Jacques Caffiéri , have been returned to the room. Displays: The Rococo at the time of Louis XV and Madame de Pompadour The Back State Room is today dedicated to
2000-508: The Louvre, as well as the finest parts of the collection of Sir Samuel Rush Meyrick , a pioneering collector and scholar of arms and armour. The arms and armour collections are today recognised as among the finest in the world. During Sir Richard Wallace's lifetime, this room formed part of the stables with the grooms' bedrooms on a mezzanine floor. Sir Richard's European arms and armour were displayed in one large gallery, today's West Gallery III, on
2080-523: The Middle Ages and Renaissance. The Sixteenth-Century Gallery comprised two smaller rooms during Sir Richard and Lady Wallace's lifetime. The contemporary photograph shows how one room was arranged by Sir Richard as a cabinet of curiosities, with paintings and maiolica densely hung on the walls and smaller works of art kept in cases or inside Renaissance cabinets. The other room, known as the Canaletto Room,
2160-493: The Netherlands' Rijksmuseum ) and provide open access to images of publicly owned, out-of-copyright paintings, prints and drawings so that they are free for the public to reproduce". A November 2023 Appeal Court judgement ( THJ v. Sheridan , 2023) by Lord Justice Arnold clarified that, in the UK, no new copyright is created in making a photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional public domain artwork, and that this has been
2240-730: The Protection of Literary and Artistic Works , the Universal Copyright Convention , and the Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 (BCIA). In particular, he considered sections 3(a) and 4(a) of the BCIA, which amend title 17, chapter 1, § 101 of the United States Code . The court inferred from the provisions of the BCIA, and the absence of US law to the contrary, that Congress had not granted foreign law
2320-751: The Spanish Embassy 1791–1795 (evidenced by "Spanish Place" the street to the east of the building ) the lease was acquired in 1797 by Francis Ingram-Seymour-Conway, 2nd Marquess of Hertford (1743–1822), who in 1814 held there the Allied Sovereigns' Ball after the first defeat of Napoleon in 1814. Francis Seymour-Conway, 3rd Marquess of Hertford (1777–1842), the family's first great art collector, lived mainly at his other London residences, Dorchester House in Mayfair and St Dunstan’s Villa in Regents Park, now
2400-403: The UK law issue. The plaintiff's motions were granted. The amicus curiae brief was filed, both parties were given leave to address the points raised by Patry's letter, and the case was re-argued and reconsidered. Kaplan commented on the plaintiff's motions in the subsequent summary judgment, saying: At the outset, it is worth noting that the post-judgment flurry was occasioned chiefly by
2480-515: The United Kingdom." He referred to the Privy Council case of Interlego v Tyco Industries for equivalent case law in the UK, where it had been held that "[s]kill, labour or judgment merely in the process of copying cannot confer originality". Further, the Privy Council had held in Interlego that "[t]here must [...] be some element of material alteration or embellishment which suffices to make
Bridgeman - Misplaced Pages Continue
2560-528: The Wallace Collection were largely collected by the 4th Marquess of Hertford in the 1860s, the last decade of his life. Like many of his contemporaries, Sir Richard Wallace used this material to bring Oriental exoticism, as it was then considered, into his fashionable London house. The Oriental Armoury was displayed on the first floor of Hertford House. Trophies of arms and armour from India, the Middle East,
2640-557: The art collection to take up residence in England, following the unstable political climate in France following the Prussian Siege of Paris (1870–1871). Wallace in turn expanded the art collection, adding medieval and Renaissance objects and European arms and armour. Between 1872–1882 the house was much altered by Sir Richard Wallace, who added a rear extension to house his art collection with
2720-530: The aspect it had in Sir Richard Wallace's day more than any other room in the building. This room reveals the opulence of the London town house in the 1870s and sets the scene for visitors to the Wallace Collection. The State Rooms were the grandest rooms in the house, in which the most important visitors were received. When it was the home of Sir Richard and Lady Wallace, visitors to Hertford House first entered
2800-494: The awe-inspiring jousts, tournaments and festivals of the time. Fine arms and armour were considered works of art as much as warlike equipment. Displayed in this gallery are some of the finest examples of the armourer's art, exquisite sculptures richly embellished with gold and silver. This space was formerly part of Sir Richard Wallace's stables. Displays: Later Arms and Armour (sixteenth to nineteenth centuries) The array of sporting guns, rifles and pistols in this room includes
2880-537: The case has limited precedential value, or that (even though it was a federal court case) it has no application outside of the state of New York. Others who reject the judgment on the Bridgeman case have pointed to Schiffer Publishing v. Chronicle Books as providing a contrary decision. However, in Schiffer , the facts of the case differed. In particular, the plaintiff had not been making any attempt at full fidelity with
2960-592: The case since 2009. The Wallace Collection The Wallace Collection is a museum in London occupying Hertford House in Manchester Square , the former townhouse of the Seymour family, Marquesses of Hertford . It is named after Sir Richard Wallace , who built the extensive collection, along with the Marquesses of Hertford, in the 18th and 19th centuries. The collection features fine and decorative arts from
3040-661: The case. Indeed, it did not even cite Graves' case, the supposedly controlling authority that the Court is said to have overlooked. On February 26, 1999, Kaplan again granted the defendant's motion for a summary dismissal of the suit, in a second summary judgment. In the judgment Kaplan considered Patry's arguments, the Copyright Clause in Article One of the United States Constitution , the Berne Convention for
3120-535: The collection include 5 Rembrandts (and school), 9 Rubens's, 4 Van Dycks, 8 Canalettos, 9 Guardis, 19 François Bouchers, Fragonard , 9 Murillos, 9 Teniers, 2 Titians, Poussin , 3 Velázquezs and 8 Watteaus. The inventory of pictures, watercolours and drawings comprises all the major European schools. Dutch School: English School Flemish School French School: Italian School Spanish School There are fine examples of porcelain on display, including Meissen porcelain , and one of
3200-473: The conservatory, in place of a Venetian window on the Landing and two first-floor rooms on each wing. The Porphyry Court was little more than a rather dismal back yard until 2000, when it was transformed by being doubled in size and provided with a dramatic pair of flights of stairs. The Collection numbers nearly 5,500 objects, a range of fine and decorative arts from the 15th to the 19th centuries. The collection
3280-411: The courts have said that copyright can only subsist in subject matter that is original in the sense that it is the author's own 'intellectual creation'. Given this criterion, it seems unlikely that what is merely a retouched, digitised image of an older work can be considered as 'original'. This is because there will generally be minimal scope for a creator to exercise free and creative choices if their aim
Bridgeman - Misplaced Pages Continue
3360-586: The day over an enjoyable pipe or cigar. The room had oriental interiors, with walls lined with Turkish-style tiles made by the Minton factory in Stoke-on-Trent, the floor laid with a patterned mosaic. A small section of this interior survives in the alcove at the north end of the room. This was not only a highly fashionable look for a late Victorian smoking room but also practical, ensuring the smell of smoke did not linger in any fabric furnishings. The Landing serves as
3440-611: The decision of a federal district court , Bridgeman is not binding precedent on other federal or state courts, but it has nevertheless been highly influential as persuasive authority , and is widely followed by other federal courts. Several federal courts have followed the ruling in Bridgeman . In Meshwerks v. Toyota , 528 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2008), the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit favorably cited Bridgeman v. Corel , extending
3520-473: The digital images on Corel's CD-ROM was Bridgeman's own digitizations of its photographs. It claimed that since it owned the copyright on its photographs, Corel's copies were infringements of its copyright. Both parties moved for summary judgment . Judge Lewis Kaplan in the Southern District Court of New York issued two judgments. On November 13, 1998, Kaplan granted the defendant's motion for
3600-428: The effort of copying, itself, does not constitute originality. The significance of the case and the doubts that it raised prompted the private Museums Copyright Group in the UK to commission an in-depth report on the case and to seek the opinion of Jonathan Rayner James, Q.C., a barrister who specialized in UK copyright law and a co-author of Copinger and Skone James on copyright . Rayner James' opinion, as reported by
3680-626: The entire collection to the nation. The collection opened to permanent public view in 1900 in Hertford House, and remains there to this day. A condition of the bequest was that no object should ever leave the collection, even for loan exhibitions. However in September 2019, the board of trustees announced that they had obtained an order from the Charity Commission for England & Wales which allowed them to enter into temporary loan agreements for
3760-467: The fact that the plaintiff failed competently to address most of the issues raised by this interesting case prior to the entry of final judgment. In particular, while plaintiff urged the application of UK law, it made no serious effort to address the choice of law issue and no effort at all (apart from citing the British copyright act) to bring pertinent UK authority to the Court's attention before plaintiff lost
3840-459: The first floor, directly above European Armoury I. Displays: Renaissance Arms and Armour (fifteenth to seventeenth centuries) The Wallace Collection contains some of the most spectacular Renaissance arms and armour in Britain. All of the richest and most powerful noblemen of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries commissioned beautifully decorated weapons and armour, not just for war, but also for use in
3920-525: The first summary judgment caused the court, in the words of Kaplan, to be "bombarded with additional submissions" from the plaintiff . The plaintiff moved, on November 23, for reconsideration and re-argument, on the grounds that the court's assessment of the copyrightability of the works was in error. In support of this motion it pointed to a certificate of copyright issued by the United States Register of Copyrights for one of Bridgeman's photographs,
4000-483: The first time. The United Kingdom is particularly rich in the works of the ancien régime , purchased by wealthy families during the revolutionary sales , held in France after the end of the French Revolution . The Wallace Collection, Waddesdon Manor and the Royal Collection , all three located in the United Kingdom, are some of the largest, most important collections of French 18th-century decorative arts in
4080-564: The freehold from the Portman Estate . Hertford House first opened as a museum on 22 June 1900. In 2000, the inner courtyard was given a glass roof and a restaurant was opened named "Cafe Bagatelle" after the Château de Bagatelle in Paris purchased in 1835 by Francis Seymour-Conway, 3rd Marquess of Hertford , later part of Scott's inheritance. The museum display does not aim to reconstruct the state of
SECTION 50
#17328513131824160-469: The group in a press release, was: [A]s a matter of principle, a photograph of an artistic work can qualify for copyright protection in English law, and that is irrespective of whether [...] the subject of the photographs is more obviously a three dimensional work, such as a sculpture, or is perceived as a two dimensional artistic work, such as a drawing or painting [...] Stokes (2001) argued that, under UK law,
4240-488: The house when Sir Richard and Lady Wallace lived here. The Entrance Hall contains marble busts of the three principal founders of the Wallace Collection: Richard Seymour-Conway, 4th Marquess of Hertford (1800–1870), his son, Sir Richard Wallace (1818–1890) and in the lobby, Lady Wallace, who bequeathed the contents of Hertford House to the British nation on her death in 1897. The room has retained
4320-496: The illegitimate son of the 4th Marquess . In the 19th century, the Marquesses of Hertford were one of the wealthiest families in Europe. They owned large properties in England, Wales and Ireland, and increased their wealth through successful marriages. Politically of lesser importance, the 3rd and 4th Marquess and Sir Richard Wallace became leading art collectors of their time. The Wallace Collection, comprising about 5,500 works of art,
4400-581: The lands of the old Ottoman Empire, and the Far East, patterned the walls of the Oriental Armoury, whilst the ceiling was decorated with a pattern of gold stars on a deep blue background. Displays: Medieval and Renaissance Arms and Armour (tenth to sixteenth centuries) Sir Richard Wallace acquired most of his European armour in 1871, when he bought the collections of the comte Alfred Emilien de Nieuwekerke, Minister of Fine Arts to Napoleon III and director of
4480-548: The lease of Hertford House, passed to his distant cousin Francis Seymour, 5th Marquess of Hertford (1812–1884). However the 4th Marquess's illegitimate son and heir of his unentailed estate, Sir Richard Wallace, 1st Baronet (1818–1890), inherited his art collection, French and Irish estates, and re-purchased Sudbourne Hall in Suffolk and in 1871 the lease of Hertford House from the 5th Marquess, and returned from Paris with much of
4560-473: The main orientation point on the first floor. It is hung with mythological and pastoral paintings by Boucher and is also perhaps the best place to admire the wrought iron work of the staircase balustrade, made in 1719 for the Royal bank in Paris. Hertford House was built in 1776–78 for the 4th Duke of Manchester. After a brief spell as the Spanish Embassy, it was bought by the 2nd Marquess of Hertford in 1797. He added
4640-572: The main part of her husband's art collection to the nation, thus forming the "Wallace Collection", the rest, including the French properties and Hertford House, going to the couple's secretary Sir John Murray Scott, 1st Baronet . Scott sold the lease of Hertford House to the UK Government, as a suitable home for the Wallace Collection, after which he was rewarded with a baronetcy, and the Government acquired
4720-401: The material facts of Schiffer differ from those of Bridgeman . Bielstein concludes from this that far from Schiffer contradicting Bridgeman , it actually reinforces it and builds upon it, confirming that an "interpretive dimension or spark of originality" over and above "slavish copying", conferred originality and copyrightability. As a US court case, Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.
4800-459: The only way in which Bridgeman's and Corel's photographs were similar was that "both are exact reproductions of public domain works of art," so the only similarity between the two works was an uncopyrightable element: the public domain material itself. Therefore, under well-settled US law, there could be no infringement. In the judgment, Kaplan noted that the court would have reached the same result had it applied US law throughout. The entry of
4880-409: The paintings themselves had expired, but Bridgeman claimed that it owned a copyright on the photographs. It licensed copies of its photographs for a fee. Bridgeman sued Corel. It claimed that since no other photographs of the public domain works had been authorized other than those that Bridgeman itself had been authorized to make, by the museums where the works were held, the only possible source for
SECTION 60
#17328513131824960-617: The palatial Somerset House on the Strand as his townhouse, but did not live to see its completion. The present House in Manchester Square was the townhouse of a later junior branch of the family. It was built in 1776 by George Montagu, 4th Duke of Manchester who owned and developed the surrounding estate. It dominates the north side of the Square, where it occupies an island site, and was originally named "Manchester House". After being used as
5040-462: The patronage of King Louis XV (1715–1774) and his mistress, Madame de Pompadour. It displays some of the prominent examples in the Wallace Collection of art in the rococo style. Sir Richard Wallace used the Back State Room to entertain guests at Hertford House. During his lifetime it had wooden boiserie panelling on the wall; the great chandelier, by Jacques Caffiéri , dating from 1751, remains in
5120-401: The photography of such works, by dint of the lighting and other techniques involved in producing a photograph that renders the work to best photographic effect (possibly better than what would be visible to a person viewing the original painting on display in the relevant museum), would constitute originality, per Laddie, and not merely a "slavish copy". However, the review of UK authorities in
5200-462: The power to determine the issue of copyrightability in US copyright actions. In other words, Congress did not adopt the Second Restatement 's rule, under which the law of the state with the most direct relation to the property (i.e. the UK in this case) would apply. In particular, the wording of section 4(a) of the BCIA prohibits copyrights from being claimed "by virtue of, or in reliance upon,
5280-488: The provisions of the Berne Convention or the adherence of the United States thereto". The application of UK law in the case would be in reliance upon the Berne Convention, therefore it could not apply and US law should be used to determine the copyrightability of the Bridgeman photographs. Thus Kaplan applied US law to the issue of copyrightability, rather than UK law as in the first judgment. The second judgment provided
5360-660: The reasoning in Bridgeman to cover 3D wireframe meshes of existing 3D objects. The appeals court wrote "[T]he law is becoming increasingly clear: one possesses no copyright interest in reproductions ... when these reproductions do nothing more than accurately convey the underlying image". Specifically following Bridgeman, the appeals court wrote, "In Bridgeman Art Library , the court examined whether color transparencies of public domain works of art were sufficiently original for copyright protection, ultimately holding that, as 'exact photographic copies of public domain works of art,' they were not." The Meshwerks opinion also revisited
5440-465: The room. Displays: Eighteenth-century still lifes and portraits The room contains masterworks of French 18th-century portraiture by Nattier and Houdon and two oil sketches by Jean François de Troy , for decoration of Louis XV's dining room in Fontainebleau, shown to the king for approval. Displays: The Decorative Arts under Louis XIV Displays: Visitor Reception and Cloakroom This room
5520-480: The second judgment of Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. does highlight several points in UK law. For example, it draws attention to the fact that Graves' Case , dating as it does from 1867, no longer reflects the law of originality in the UK, in light of later cases such as Interlego . The Bridgeman Art Library itself stated in 2006 that it is "looking for a similar test case in the UK or Europe to fight which would strengthen [its] position". In November 2015,
5600-774: The site of the residence of the US Ambassador. Between 1836-51 Hertford House was let for use as the French Embassy. His son Richard Seymour-Conway, 4th Marquess of Hertford (1800–1870), who expanded his father's art collection, lived most of his life in Paris, and rarely visited Hertford House, used "largely as a store for his ever-expanding art collection". He is said never to have visited his principal English country seat of Ragley Hall in Warwickshire. The 4th Marquess died in 1870, aged 70 in Paris, unmarried and without legitimate issue, and his titles and entailed estates, including
5680-405: The subjects, lighting, angle, selection of film and camera, evoking the desired expression, and almost any other variant involved". But he ruled that the plaintiff, by its own admission, had performed "slavish copying", which did not qualify for copyright protection. "[I]ndeed", he elaborated, "the point of the exercise was to reproduce the underlying works with absolute fidelity". He noted that "[i]t
5760-399: The totality of the work an original work", rendering the mere change in medium of a work, on its own, not sufficient for copyrightability. Thus the question of originality and copyrightability of a "slavish copy", even one where the medium changed (i.e. from a painting to a photograph, and thence to a digitization of that photograph), would be decided the same under UK law as under US law. As
5840-545: The works being photographed, and thus the photographs comprised an element of originality. As stated in Schiffer , "[t]he tone and value of colors in the Schiffer photograph[s] differed from those of the actual fabric swatch", meaning that not only was fidelity not achieved, but in fact the photographs were visibly inaccurate representations of the works photographed. The presiding judge in the case, Judge Berle M. Schiller, cited Bridgeman and went to great lengths to demonstrate that
5920-458: The world's major collections of 18th-century Sèvres porcelain . It includes 137 vases, 80 tea wares, 67 useful wares, 3 biscuit figures and 130 plaques (mostly on furniture), and was acquired by the Marquesses of Hertford and Sir Richard Wallace between c. 1802–75. The Wallace Collection holds one of the most important collections of French furniture in the UK, and ranks alongside the Musée du Louvre ,
6000-438: The world, rivalled only by the Musée du Louvre , Château de Versailles and Mobilier National in France. The Wallace Collection is a non-departmental public body and the current director is Xavier Bray. The Wallace Collection is a museum which displays works of art collected in the 18th and 19th centuries by five generations of a British aristocratic family – the first four Marquesses of Hertford and Sir Richard Wallace ,
6080-451: Was bequeathed to the British nation by Lady Wallace in 1897. The state then decided to buy Hertford House to display the collection and it was opened as a museum in 1900. As a museum the Wallace Collection's main strength is 18th-century French art : paintings, furniture, porcelain, sculpture and gold snuffboxes and 16th- to 19th-century paintings by such as Titian , Van Dyck , Rembrandt , Hals , Velázquez , Gainsborough and Delacroix ,
6160-448: Was formerly Sir Richard and Lady Wallace's breakfast room. As this photograph from c. 1890 shows, it contained a large cabinet filled with Sèvres porcelain dinner wares, probably more for use than decoration, and sixteen Dutch pictures. The French chimneypiece in this room was made in the mid-18th century and installed in this room when the house was modified for Sir Richard and Lady Wallace. Displays: Wallace Collection Shop This room
6240-469: Was formerly part of Sir Richard Wallace's coach house and stable yard. Displays: The Collector's Cabinet The Sixteenth-Century Gallery houses works of art from the Medieval and Renaissance periods and a group of important Renaissance paintings. This part of the Wallace Collection was mainly assembled by Sir Richard who, like many 19th-century collectors, was fascinated by the art and history of Europe during
6320-427: Was occupied during Sir Richard and Lady Wallace's lifetime by the family's housekeeper. Lady Wallace's housekeeper was Mrs Jane Buckley, a Londoner by birth. There were over thirty servants, including housemaids, kitchen maids, a lady's maid, a butler, footmen, a valet, coachmen, a groom and stable lads. Displays: East European, Turkish and Indo-Persian Arms, Armour and Works of Arts The Oriental arms and armour in
6400-473: Was used to display the collection of paintings by Canaletto. Displays: Medieval and Renaissance Works of Art The Smoking Room exhibits paintings and works of art from the Medieval and Renaissance periods, including the greater part of Sir Richard Wallace's collection of Italian Renaissance maiolica. Sir Richard Wallace would have invited his male guests to the Smoking Room after dinner, to discuss affairs of
#181818