It makes sense fuzzy, it is more in line with the law than my view.

My feelings are that following that path leads to almost all man made things being the interlectual property of the designer/artist.  It is a path society seems to be taking at the moment but I would not condone it.

If I take a photograph of a piece of Norman Forster architecture am I infringing his copyright ?  Many would say his designs are works of art, lets take one: The Milau suspension bridge is there for all to see. It could not be more on public view, the worlds highest bridge. Why should I not stand on public property and photograph it ? Is what I see not my own vision of the world ?

And every one said, 'If we only live,
We too will go to sea in a Sieve,---
To the hills of the Chankly Bore!'
Far and few, far and few, Are the lands where the Jumblies live;
Their heads are green, and their hands are blue, And they went to sea in a Sieve.

Edward Lear
http://www.nonsenselit.org/Lear/ns/jumblies.html