[rjordan393]

I was going to print out a copy of the structure of an atom. I noticed it was copyrighted. How can this occur? How do you copyright God's creation? Is this Country going banana's?

[kriggy]

Ist probably just the picture / scheme that is copyrighted. You IMO fine to print it for your personal use. If you want to do a presentation or use it it some written work then you should cite the author and the book you took it from

[billnotgatez]

@rjordan393
is there a link to the diagram?

[Arkcon]

I was going to print out a copy of the structure of an atom.

Shine on you crazy diamond.

I noticed it was copyrighted.

That happens, yes.

How can this occur?

You write, (c) yourname 2015 and that's all anyone has to do for anything.

How do you copyright God's creation?

You don't, you copyright yours, the drawing, the explanation, other artwork, etc.

Is this Country going banana's?

This has been the case for quite a while, maybe even before the 1800's, but not likely much before.  Not really all that surprising as technology advances.

[rjordan393]

Quote

How do you copyright God's creation?


You don't, you copyright yours, the drawing, the explanation, other artwork, etc.

But there must be hundreds or more of drawings of the atom that are similar. So what's the point? There are times when I see someone or a company getting sued over what is claimed copyright infringement because their drawing is too similar. If I were a judge, I throw the plantiff right out of my courtroom.
I made a copy of the atoms structure from another website.

[Corribus]

Similar and identical are two different things. Copyright laws are complicated but also important.

[Furanone]

If the atom's electrons are close enough in orbit with the copyrighted material they may get sued. If they are outside the orbit, they may not get sued. Even if there is enough of a deviation of the electron's orbit, there may still be a case for copyright infringement and it will be up to a judge to decide. It's kind of like Schrodinger's cat, and it's all just very messed up.

Who should get sole credit for anything since Einstein's flashes of genius were in large part due to him reading all the past works of brilliant physicists and synthesizing it to take it that one important step further? As Newton said when he was accused of the same: "They might be giants, but we stand on their shoulders and see that much further beyond the horizon". All we want is our pat on the head to say we matter and are not insignificant, so give the guy who was somehow divinely inspired to develop this copyrighted atom structure his pat on the head and as Kriggy said cite the author in any upcoming publication, and then balance in the universe is restored.