What if (as it appears to be in this case) the second photographer intentionally used your photograph as a template for his own, copying it to the extent that a casual observer would not notice that they are different, putting in the effort to make it as much as possible like yours? There's many more similarities in those pictures - e.g. it's the same location, the same iconic background buildings, the same shade of red and the detail of the sky has been removed in both.
I don't think the judge would have ruled this way if it had been a coincidence that the photos are alike.
I don't think the judge would have ruled this way if it had been a coincidence that the photos are alike.