In a message dated 9/1/2007 10:42:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, bvelke@whollygenes.com writes: If one takes a poor copy of a document (e.g., because that's all that still exists) and reconstructs an image which is indistinguishable from the document when originally published, then that requires original creativity and is covered by copyright, according to my intellectual property attorney. In other words, your talent in restoring an original doesn't disqualify you from copyright protection on your creative work. Bob Velke Bob- It sure would be interesting to see how that came out if challenged in court. I believe Ancestry invented a grayscale process that enhanced their census images and yet they don't claim copyright to their images. They do, however, hold the patent to the PROCESS that enhanced the originals. I tend to think that copyright of images would extend to those images that were artistically changed to create a work of art rather than a restoration--but, obviously, that is why we have lawyers and courts. It is a complex issue and could go either way. Joan ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour