A photograph is not an idea. I don't know UK law, but I know that in the US, ideas are not subject to copyright protection, the expression of one is. As I wrote that, I discovered I had misinterpreted your point. I don't think this ruling would happen, or at least be upheld by a higher court, in the US. Clearly the "copy" is going after the same idea, but it's a completely different image, mostly because of the angle, and would be considered not a copy here in the US. As to some of the responses calling this a derivative work. I'm pretty sure a derivative work is one that is in a different medium than the original. I'll get the answer to that question on Monday though (currently in a law school class on copyright. Have taken basic IP and an Entertainment law course that cover copyright). A real world example of what I know to be derivative works: movies based on comic books. Oh, and to the idiot below who said that photo's are barely copyrightable? Not true, at least not in the US. These two photos would both be subject to copyright protection in the US, and not just what we call "thin copyright."