So called "copyright" pictures - Page 5

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

 Grant> On 2003-11-24, Ralph Mason
 >>
 >>
 >>> It depends on the agreement signed.  A photographer hired as a contractor
 >>> will always hold the copyright unless he signs it away.
 >>
 >> Why does the same not hold true for software?

 Grant> Sure.  If you read the contract, it assigns copyright to the
 Grant> employer.

 >> Doesn't seem different at all to me.

 Grant> If you hire a photographer and pay him strictly by the hour,
 Grant> and provide the equipment and materials, then the copyright
 Grant> probably belongs to you.

That's exactly INCORRECT.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 06:22:43 +1300, Ralph Mason
Quoted text here. Click to load it

In the UK, and EU, it does hold true.  Normally your contract of employment,
which you agree to, would transfer the copyright of any work done in the
course of your employment to your employer.
My contract did although I wasn't employed to write software!

--
Cheers,
Stan Barr     stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it
employment,


That's also not true. If you are not employed to write software, the rights
doesn't go to your employer.

Cheers
Gerard



Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

My contract said that the rights of all intellectual creations, such as
computer software, text etc, done as a part of my employment, were the
property of my employer.  What I did in my own time, however, was mine
- of course if I made use of anything I had done for my employer that,
would be a copyright violation.  Although I wasn't employed to write
software if my employer had asked my to, and I had done so, the copy-
right would have been theirs.

They did send me on a software course*, but it was mostly so I could
understand what it was possible to do - we had programmers to actually
write the stuff.

* NCC Filetab - one of the first, and IMHO one of the best, systems
for writing data handling programs.
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr     stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it
the
rights

That wasn't the contract DEC had.  It had a blanket for everything
and paperwork for exceptions.  One of the diagnositc guys invented
something and wanted to take a patent out.  He had to get a waiver
from DEC so that he owned the patent.  IIRC, his bit had to do
with clothes washers and the lawyers deemed that the patent
was not competition.  

<snip>

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

[snip]

Quoted text here. Click to load it

     Disk drives!

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Appearances can be deceiving.  The difference was presence of H_2O.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Disk drives after the sprinkler system went off on the unattended graveyard
weekend shift.
   Jack Peacock



Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Wow!  You had a sprinkler system?

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com writes:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

At Weyerhaeuser, we not only had a sprinkler system in the computer
room, we had a sprinkler  directly over the main chassis (more
specifically, the CPU boards).  One day Physical Plant decided to test
it.

Amazingly enough, once the boards were all dried off, it rebooted and
ran just fine!  This was a Harris /6 or /7 (can't remember now).
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D.       Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science       FAX   -- (505) 646-1002
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

We had a computer mixing cosmetics (one of the first embedded
controllers if you will) and one day it dumped LANOLIN all over
itself! FS dipped boards in trico', blow dry, and plug back in! - RM


Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The word "flammable" and "auto-ignite" comes to mind with
both of those substances. Mix, and apply electricity.
Perhaps you should be glad you had the sprinkler.

-- mrr



Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yuck.  What a mess.  Was it wrinkle remover?

/BAH


Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it


More generally speaking (and slightly simplified):

Creative work that is subject to copyright protection
-- will be the creator's/inventor's own if
   -- the work was created by himself on his own and
   -- with his own means and tools and
   -- in his own time
   ("own" meaning "owned or paid for by the creator")
-- will be the employer's if
   -- the creator was hired explicitely for that reason
      (e.g., software developer as employee), or
   -- the creator was hired for other work but used
      time/equipment/resources paid for by the employer(*), or
   -- such a transfer of copyright was agreed in the
      employment contract, or
   -- (USA, but not Europe) a person or company is hired
      to create a specific work to specifications provided
      by the employing person or agency (i.e., "work for hire";
      most prominent examples: special effects for movies).

To make matters more complicated, many contries distinguish between
copyright as such and the rights to a commercial exploitation of the
work -- this is why the "work for hire" rule would be impossible in many
European countries: The original creator will retain his copyright, just
the right to *commercial* exploitation (i.e., for profit) goes to the
hiring person/company. This allows the original creator to use the work
for any non-profit purpose if he choses so (such as presenting it at
festivals or showing it in his own portfolio). Under the U.S. "work for
hire" rule, all the nice special effects you did are Warner Bros.'s and
you can't even enter them in an award competition (but Warner can if
they chose to do so).

Helmut

(*) That situation touches close on the "on-the-job-inventions" issue
and has been subject to countless legal disputes...


Re: So called "copyright" pictures
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 06:22:43 +1300, "Ralph Mason"

Quoted text here. Click to load it
It does. However, works produced by an employee are assumed to be
"works for hire" and belong to the employer. Works produced by a
contractor, otoh, are assumed to be the property of the contractor.
Contracts often include a provision that the copyright be assigned to
the client, (in my contracts, usually after final payment is made :-)

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Most ethical issues in the USA are settled according to an old
principle known as "the golden rule". Briefly sated, it says that
"he who has the gold, makes the rules".

In legal terms, this means that whenever a contractual relationship
is established, one of the parties is more likely to have consulted
a lawyer, and to be in a position to demand that the contract be
executed according to a text prepared by this party and his
lawyer, with no changes allowed. "If you don't like these words,
you don't have to sign, but don't worry, this is all standard
'boilerplate'."

In the case of a professional photographer contracting with a
private individual, the photographer is the stronger party.

In the case of an individual programmer contracting with a
corporate client, the corporation is the stronger party.
--
/ Lars Poulsen        +1-805-569-5277   http://www.beagle-ears.com/lars /
   125 South Ontare Rd, Santa Barbara, CA 93105 USA  lars@beagle-ears.com


Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it


The one (admittedly not often terribly effective) counterbalance to
this is the legal principle that when the language of a contract is
ambiguous, the courts must follow the interpretation that favors the
party who did NOT draft the contract.

--
Roland Hutchinson              Will play viola da gamba for food.

NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Approximately 11/24/03 03:37, Tim Shoppa uttered for posterity:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

  What professional film is available that a consumer can't buy?
  It might be expensive, as in first that consumer would have to
  spend some bucks on an 8x10 view camera and lenses, but after
  that, the film is available to anyone.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

  Wonder what escape clauses are available in the case of something
  as highly personal and emotional as wedding photo's in the case
  where the photographer has gone out of business and their inventory
  of master negatives and/or prints has not been picked up by another
  shop?   Since I don't even watch lawyer shows, have no clue...but
  would have a hard time figuring out, by definition, who the plaintiff
  would be in such a case.

  The OP can always pick up a $200-300 scanner and a $1000 Olympus or
similar
  dye sublimation printer and create copies that will last longer than
  any silver-process version.



--
Still a Raiders fan, but no longer sure why.


Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Exactly, but  then you'd  go to a  "professional" shop to  have copies
made for  you (or you would do  them yourself!).  You'd not  go to the
dumby-dumber photo copy shop.


--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                          http://www.informatimago.com/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I wonder what would have happened, if the original photographer had been
found. If there would be no more negative available, the photographer might
have been used the same type of copying machine for the photo. ... toggle
some switch or simply put some professional paper into the machine and go
on...

Site Timeline