Topic starter
15/01/2009 4:12 pm
We've had a few copyright issues/discussions, so I'd like to explain a few things to give you an idea on how to deal with copyrights and pictures. I hope the laywers amongst you will forgive me for simplyfying things as copyright laws are one of the most complicated issues you can imagine, not to speak of big differences when it comes to international copyrights.
First of all: EVERY pictures is copyright protected by principle. It doesn't matter whether the print has a copyright stamp on the back or even the name of the photographer. The photographer, whether a professional one or just you and me, holds a copyright immediately and in the moment he takes the picture. This copyright lasts until 70 years after the photographer has passed away; after his death his heirs are the copyright holders.
Under strict interpretation of the law you might only publish (post on a message board IS publishing) a picture when you're the copyright holder (took the picture by yourself or inherited the copyright), or when you have the permission from the copyright holder to do so.
What happens when you publish a copyright-protected picture without permission? The copyright holder may sue you for compensation. And this can become very expensive.
An example from real life: A colleague her at work once took a picture of a shark and published it along with an online article to illustrate something (I don't recall what exactly it was; but it was not an article about sharks and the picture was just 2 by 2 inches big or so). Sure enough, the photographer of that picture found the articl and we had to pay several thousand dollars for using that tiny thumbnail of a picture, while the pictures was online only for a two or three weeks. Bad luck - this photographer was one of the world's most famous shark photographers and he usually takes huge amounts of money for the permission to use his pictures ...
What does this mean? Don't publish pictures from professional photographers without permission. Don't take pictures from the website of a TV station or newspaper. Don't publish a picture where you think the photographer, whether professional or not, might not like the idea of his picture being published without permission.
I think on the steamboats.org message board we found a very good consent on what's okay to post. Let's keep this up and we won't have any problems. If I see something that I think is not okay, just don't be embarassed when I remove it. It's not personal but just to protect you and me from trouble. If you're really in doubt, ask me before you post.
Again: I think we've been okay at the message board for years now, so no reason for panic, no reason for immediately stopping to post pictures. This posting doesn't have the intention to change anything here. It's just meant as a clarification as there seams to be some confusion about copyright issues and I hope this posting has canswered most of the questions.
15/01/2009 5:28 pm
The same holds true for artwork, writing, just about any "creative" or original output. However, if you have been commissioned to paint, photo, whatever, the entity hiring you to do it owns the copyright. They may not own the article, per say, but it would be a good idea to get stuff in writing if and when you get asked to do something. Just FYI.
15/01/2009 8:18 pm
'What can bear a (C) Copyright'
Hi, Lexie &Steamboating colleagues:
I just ran to the law library and pulled one of the latest volumes on 'Copyright.' Like old steamboats, Copyright is an ever changing area due now to the increasing use of computers, web sites, publications newsletters etc. I don't want to 'jump' great postings or belabor the topic. A subject I've been delving into since last summer.
What Works Are Protected? 1. Literary works. 2. Musical inculding any accompanying words. 3. Dramatic works with music. 4. Pantomines and choreogaphy. 5. Pictorial, graphic and sculptural works. 6. Motion pictures and other audiovisual works. 7. Sound recordings [Termed 'phonorecords']. 8. Architectural works.
From my personal involvements it is recognized that a number of libraries [Public and private], archiives, repositories, museums, historical sites etc. containing papers, photos, ephemera etc. may subscribe to Copyright (C) for general use. Many of the previous may also apply regulations to their collections in accordance with their mission statement/purpose, constitution/by-laws, wishes of offiers or directors or those of donors or depositors of materials that may be considered of a 'sensitive' political, social or personal nature. But not all off limits for usual and customary use. In some cases at Literary Club I am free to open/share materials. Other papers ad monographs have 'restrictions' due to their nature. Examples are: 'Insider' views on corporate negotiations or dealings such as P&G, or the economic/political matters with the Cincinnati BENGALS team. In our archives are limitations on the use of papers, letters etc. from the Taft family extending back to Alphonso Taft, son President William Howard Taft and Robert Taft. Photos may be freely used in cases just as long as 'credit' is given to the source with no evidence of restrictions or Copyright. Repositories must also be 'compassionate' in the use of materials for interest, research etc. It can be sticky at times. Mere ownership of a book, manuscript, painting, or any other phonorecord does not give the possessor the copyright. Transfer of any material object that embodies a protected work does not of itself convey any rights in the copyright.
Well, what do I know?
Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River.
18/01/2009 10:53 am
Copyright litigation is mainly a way to enrich lawyers. Keep that in mind before you sue.
18/01/2009 7:22 pm
RE: 'Copyright suits & realized profits.'
Hi, Alan & Steamboating colleagues:
Alan has nailed it right in his posting on this thread. Copyright extends back to our U.S. Constitution of 1787 in Article I Sec. 8 as a means not only to protect the creative process of writers but to encourage intellectual and artistic endeavors. In recent years there are interests/individuals that contort the law as a weapon or device to intimidate and frighten. Lawsuits are a dime a dozen. Some individuals, companies, institutions have filed so many lawsuits [Many unnecessasry] they've been 'red flagged.' *ALL works/photos published etc. before 1923 are now in the 'Public Domain.' This also includes newspaper articles as they rank as 'factual' data and such laws don't regulate the ownership of basic facts.
Many works published between 1923-1963 are also in the 'Public Domain' if the Copyright owner failed to register, renew, lost or didn't accomplish the proper registration forms with fees. Failure to document a transfer of a work in words, art, photos etc. properly to an heir, corporation or designated controller also makes it difficult for a suit to be filed and prosecuted. That which is not so marked with (C), or such regulations, would fall under 'Innocent Infringement.' This differs from deliberate infringement or illegal use in a knowing way. Purchase, gift or otherwise obtaining a work marked with (C) Copyright does not always convey freedom or use of that material unless legally updated and formally signed over. It's sticky, for sure, but the claimant would have to prove financial damages, loss or other issue of inconvenience. It's good to know where you stand with material objects, art, writings, photos but I wouldn't be overly concerned with a beat-up 100 year old steamboat photo unmarked or otherwise failing to display a disclaimer. Copyright basically from the beginning dealt with words; their arrangement and style in relating a message or story. Copyright is often still in a dusty file in Washington, D.C. long after the creator is long gone and their work totally forgotten with it not being renewed.
Trademarks, logos, slogans, titles etc. fall outside of Copyright law under the umbrella of trademark law state and federal. A number of former trademarks, logos used by then GREENE LINE, DELTA QUEEN CO., MAL etc. may be seen to carry a sign of (C) or similar. Examples: 'Steamboatin,' 'Getting there is half the fun,' 'FORD has a better idea,' 'I'd walk a mile for a CAMEL,' etc. along with P&G's round logo bearing the moon and stars.
Well, what do I know?
Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River,