Kelvin Wilson writes:
> Retracing a drawing ought not to make a difference in these matters.
Well, surely it does Kelvin, as it physically turns the original drawing
into another original drawing which is the authorship of the person who drew
it (especially if it is simplified as Vicky intended to do). In the same way
as an archaeological draughtsperson would like to see the copyright of their
drawings belonging to them, and not the authors of the field plans from
which they were compiled. (The latter is as I recall a subject we discussed
here before.). Surely if Vicky redraws all the plans to a common format,
adds her own shading and lettering, then it is enough to add "after XYZ".
Surely what is copyright is the drawing itself and not the archaeological
information it contains (the position of a posthole in relation to another
one for example).