"David CL Francis" wrote in message
...
No doubt you are right. My extra question is does that apply to every
souvenir sold with a picture on it even those pictures are often not
accurate but are still symbolically recognisable?

If sold as a souvenier for that building, I certainly believe so. But as I
said, I don't know that for a fact.

Copyright law in general allows for "fair use", and for example a photograph
of the NYC skyline that includes a distinctive structure wouldn't be liable
for royalties. But I believe that if the item is specifically valuable
*because* of a single distinctive structure, royalties would be due.

I have a drinking Mug, which I have never used because I cannot bring
myself to use it after what happened, that I purchased at the top of the
South Tower of the WTC on the 8th September 2001. It has a representation
of the New York Skyline on it. Would the manufacturer be likely to have
paid a fee to reproduce that?

Assuming the mug wasn't sold specifically as a WTC mug, I don't see why it
would have. But not being an expert in copyright law, don't take my word
for it.

Pete