So called "copyright" pictures - Page 3

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

 Bryan> [...]
 >>
 >>> If anyone has copyright on these pictures it is my daughter, not
 >>> someone hired to record the event for a fee.
 >> Sorry, but legally, the photographer owns the copyright unless it was
 >> explicitly assigned to you in a contract of sale. Wedding
 >> photographers love to stick it to you vigorously by charging for
 >> albums. When we were choosing wedding photographers, one of our
 >> criteria was to make sure we would own the copyright and negatives.

 Bryan> There has to be something in copyright law to be said about
 Bryan> the disappearance of the author.

The status of a copyright is not affected by whether you happen
to be able to locate the copyright owner.  (And if he died,
then his estate owns the copyright.)

The practical question is whether you think he's going to find
out and sue you for making unauthorized copies of his work.  
On the other hand, it could be very costly if he did.


Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The law allows the copyright to be inherited and stay valid for a number of
years (49? 75?).




Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it
of

The American law follows Mickey Mouse, and other in other countries, the law
dutifully follows America.  So the copyright remains in the original owner's
estate until Mikey Mouse is no longer economically viable.




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

Although following Mickey Mouse is certainly a factor, the most recent
round of extensions (to 70 years for corporations or 70 years after
the death of the author, if I recall correctly) was passed in Europe
before the USA.  Conformity with Europe was cited as one factor in
extending it here.

-- Patrick


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

Europe set it to 70 years, as that was the longest protection any
of the member states had in place before it became common across
the whole EU. I think it was Germany which already had the 70 year
figure (it was 50 years in the UK).

--
Andrew Gabriel

Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

But in USA it is definitely mouse-driven, as Mickey Mouse just celebrated 75 and
is still copyrighted.
--
[ When replying, remove *'s from address ]
Alexandre Peshansky, Systems Manager, RUH, NY
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
wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

You can easily fight this: just don't fill the brains of your children
with  Mickey Mouse  pudding.   Fill  them with  your  own culture  and
science!

--
__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
wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

In the UK, there was one extension -- the Beatrix Potter childrens books.
She left all the rights to them to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for
Sick Children. When the copyright expired, the government extended the
copyright so that the hospital would continue to benefit. I think it
required an act of Parliament.

--
Andrew Gabriel

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

Close but no cigar.  It's J.M. Barrie's "Peter Pan."

Craig

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
On 24 Nov 2003 21:25:58 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew

Quoted text here. Click to load it
wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Doesn't the UK conform to the WIPO requirements? That was the
purported reason for the extension in the US.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
snipped-for-privacy@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) writes:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

For some reason, I'd thought that was Peter Pan....
--
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
the law
owner's
75 and

I have heard that the limit is the life of Walt Disney (the origianl
copyright holder) plus 70 years.  Still some time to go.

Mickey Mouse (the character image) is also a registered trademark.  That may
present some complications.





Re: So called "copyright" pictures
           alex*@*mail.rockefeller.edu "Alexandre Peshansky" writes:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
and
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Please remember that the time period _starts_ from the death of the
creator, not from the event of creation.  Walt Disney died considerably
less than 70 years ago.

--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}                                           snipped-for-privacy@dsl.co.uk
    "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would.  Yet we are
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 believe most of the Disney works in question are under coporate
copyright, however, rather than by Walt.  That means (for those works) a
fixed term.

hawk
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics    /"\   ASCII ribbon campaign
snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu  Smeal 178  (814) 375-4700      \ /   against HTML mail
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

Because you think that our burocrats aren't lobbied by Americans?

--
__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
last change to "copyright" in Germany was this year in September:
(to conform with Europe which in turn cited conformity with USA as one
factor ;-))

I think the following did not change: (some other stuff did change -
protection for "copy protection" similar to DMCA?
and further changes seem to be planned)

70 years after death is default
AFAIK
pictures/movies?/music: 50 years after first publication?

References (in german)
the changes:
http://www.bmj.bund.de/images/11650.pdf
the complete text:
http://www-ti.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/~thiele/recht/UrhG.pdf

PS: i am not a lawyer...

PPS:
big media company in the USA to a senator:
"hey in europe they have 500years copyright...."
big media company in the EU to a parlamentarian
"hey in the USA they have 500years copyright...."
;-)
USA+EU to poor countries:
"accept 1000 years of copyright/patents/... on everything and we will
mercifully give you some medicines..."


Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Approximately 11/23/03 18:07, Lewin A.R.W. Edwards uttered for posterity:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

  ? Photopaint just tells you that there is a watermark when the
    image is opened.   And then you can do whatever you want with
    it.  It doesn't appear to take much to corrupt the watermark,
    simple noise cancellation does it with one click.  Adding
    noise gaussian and then a bit of blur does as well.  Or simply
    convert from JPEG to Wavelet.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

     Which ones?  Never seen a desktop graphics scanner yet with
     any currency detection built in.  Is almost as common a method
     of evaluating scanners as an IT8 or a Shirley.


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


Re: So called "copyright" pictures


Quoted text here. Click to load it

This happened to my wife just today, at Walgreen's, although it did not
get as far as the scanner. The clerk would not let her use the machine,
even though there was no protographer's or studio's name on the prints,
only because it was on Kodak "professional" print paper.





Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

If there is nothing on the print to indicate that it was produced by a
professional photographer, which my response would be "give me your
name, and call your manager."

Over the years I've spent quite a bit of money on so-called
"professional" film, paper, and chemistry, not because I'm in the
business of photography (I'm not), but because I can get better
results by avoiding the "one-size-fits-all" consumer products
and taking, developing, and printing my pictures.  A system
that uses the type of paper as a determinant of copyright is
broken.

While it's unlikely that a professional photographer will be using
low-end consumer paper products, there isn't any justification for
assuming that the converse is true.  In the areas of nominal interest
of the two newsgroups in which this thread has appeared, I think
that we all have run into the same situation: lots of nonprofessionals
use software (sometimes stolen) designed for professional users,
but it's rather uncommon to see the reverse (graphic artists, for
example, don't use "My First Painting Program").

Call the manager, then call Walgreen's regional office.

Joe Morris

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:53:06 +0000 (UTC), the renowned Joe Morris

Quoted text here. Click to load it

The potential fines for them are quite significant.. I would hope that
this would not work.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
snipped-for-privacy@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.

Site Timeline