Someone Tried to Copyright a Hill

@akalinus (40440)
United States
October 10, 2019 11:09am CST
Can you copyright nature? I saw a sign online that said you are not allowed to use any pictures you take of a hill in New Mexico. It is on private property and you need the owner's permission to publish the picture you took with your own camera. It is a violation of copyright laws if you do, the sign said. Can you copyright nature? I think this notice is laughable. The owner did not create the hill. What do you who write think about this?
8 people like this
9 responses
AmberLynn
@ScribbledAdNauseum (104632)
• United States
10 Oct 19
I think goes along with the no trespassing. A picture, even taken from a distance, can be trespassing on a person's privacy.
2 people like this
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
10 Oct 19
A mountain was there all the time. If you are in a public area and take the picture, I think it is okay. You can't take a photo of a person and use it without permission. But I hope someone here knows more about that.
1 person likes this
AmberLynn
@ScribbledAdNauseum (104632)
• United States
10 Oct 19
@akalinus I guess it also might depend on state laws as well. Maybe in some states there isn't a law that says a person can't copyright nature.
2 people like this
DE
@DaddyEvil (137145)
• United States
14 Oct 19
@ScribbledAdNauseum In the US, there is a law stating natural objects cannot be copyrighted. Copyright and design laws state that natural forms and images are public domain.
1 person likes this
crazyhorseladycx
@crazyhorseladycx (39515)
• United States
10 Oct 19
the owner might not've created the hill, but 'tis still his personal property. i ne'er take pics 'f anythin' not'n my place without permission. 'lso my intent - personal use 'r commercial. not cows, windmills, hills, arroyos, etc. there's 'lso many places here'n new mexico (northern part mostly) that're sacred lands. ya need tribal permission fer such, e'en if'n the pic 'tis not taken 'pon their lands. i've e'en written permission from the slew 'f folks that're now blockin' my sunsets to take 'n use those photos fer various purposes. i cannot 'lways crop their places out. they think i'm weird, i call 't coverin' my backside.
2 people like this
topffer
@topffer (42156)
• France
10 Oct 19
Not a hill (a building yes), but in a private property photos may be forbidden based on privacy laws (at least in the EU).
1 person likes this
topffer
@topffer (42156)
• France
10 Oct 19
@akalinus But it is not your building. You own the copyright/author's rights on your photo but you need to pay author's rights to the architect/urbanist to publish it. Same for a piece of art not in the public domain. And I am sure about that.
2 people like this
DE
@DaddyEvil (137145)
• United States
14 Oct 19
@topffer @akalinus Law here says that if you can take a photo from public property re: a public sidewalk, you own the copyright to that photo. Publish it as you wish.
2 people like this
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
10 Oct 19
I am not sure about that. If I take a photo of a building, it is my photo. If I copy their photo and claim that I took it, then it is a copyright violation. But I don't know. Hope there are people here who are experts on this.
2 people like this
Thelma
@thelme55 (76476)
• Germany
16 Oct 19
Nobody has a copyright of nature. If you take a photo of that hill, you have the copyright of that photo. The one who wrote that sign has no idea what copyright means.
1 person likes this
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
16 Oct 19
I agree. The sign says it is a violation of copyright because they own the property it is on. I disagree and so do the rest of the people on that forum.
1 person likes this
Keith Henthorne
@Scrapper88 (5957)
• United States
10 Oct 19
I do not think a person can do this. I would like to see where they get this from.
1 person likes this
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
10 Oct 19
I don't think they can either. When they put up the sign, it showed them to be ignorant and arrogant.
CarolDM
@CarolDM (203454)
• Nashville, Tennessee
10 Oct 19
Sounds kind of crazy to me.
1 person likes this
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
10 Oct 19
I think so too.
1 person likes this
Val
@valmnz (17099)
• New Zealand
12 Oct 19
I agree with @Corbin5 re the photographer owns copyright of the photo. However, I guess there's a privacy issue here too. I wouldn't want people coming and taking photos of where I live and posting them online without my permission.
DE
@DaddyEvil (137145)
• United States
14 Oct 19
Take all the pictures you want of that hill, Jo Ann! Nobody can copyright nature or natural forms! "Copyright and design patents have some limitations when applied to works and products based around things occurring in nature. Natural forms and images are part of the public domain, which means that no person can own a copyright or a patent on them."
Using Design Patents and Copyrights to Protect Nature Art - FindLaw
tinyurl.com
When you create art or design products based on natural forms and images, protecting them from imitators or copycats can present a problem. Design patents and
jaishankar
@Shivram59 (31745)
• India
16 Oct 19
@akalinus Nobody can copyright nature,but you can copyright a photograph of a natural scene you have taken with your camera.
Jo Ann
@akalinus (40440)
• United States
16 Oct 19
Yes, if you took the picture, you can copyright it. If they took the photo, you can't use it without permission.