Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:22 am
That is an interesting legal point. In theory, yes, the copyright in the photo belongs to the person who handled the camera, framed the shot, and actuated the shutter. However, if that person merely acted as a "material proxy" for someone who "viewed" the picture in their head and gave specific instructions as to how to execute that vision and actually take the picture (because he or she had, for example, an arm in a cast or some other impediment), then it would be interesting to see how courts would rule on that one in various jurisdictions.
There is no case law precedent, as far as I know.