Re: copyright?? on library photos
RE:>>I don't know where I am supposed to answer your email.
I don't know where you are supposed to answer either, however, since
this was started through email, continuing the conversation via email is
probably not a bad idea. I did a little research on this issue, but
also observed a post from SUE DUTTON and it is interesting to note
that one of us may be mislead--I don't know who until I check the dates
on the copyright laws she referenced. I do believe, however that
the body of law she referenced has been superceded by new legislation (see
RE:>>Anyway I know I don't like to look at alot of writing scribbled
all over every photo.
Here is a good link that provides in legalise what I am trying to state
in a common English.
(Part of what is stated there I have copied below. I hope I haven't
violated any copyright laws in doing this!)
To be covered by the DMCA, Copyright Management Information (CMI)
must be conveyed in connection with
a copyrighted work and CMI may constitute any of the following:
(1) information that identifies the copyrighted work, including the
title of a work, the author, and the copyright owner;
(2) information that identifies a performer whose performance is fixed
in a work, with certain exceptions;
(3) in case of an audiovisual work, information that identifies the
writer, performer, or director, with certain exceptions;
(4) terms and conditions for use of the work;
(5) identifying numbers or symbols that accompany the above information
or links to such information, for example, embedded pointers and hypertext
(6) other information as the Register of Copyrights may prescribe by
regulation, with an exception to protect the privacy of users.
RE:>>And I am not trying to police the internet.
You are doing a pretty good job of it for someone who is not trying.
:-) If it were my work and I was wanting to protect it, I would say, "THANKS!
Bob, Mr. Internet policeman". Certainly if Mary is offended, she
will says thanks as well for taking the time to alert her to this.
But see above and below concerning requirements for copyright protection.
RE:>>I already know some who say no way would they send in photos for
Unfortunately, this probably is the correct decision if, 1) the submitter
does not add a signature to the picture indicating they want their property
rights protected, or 2) they include a request that the display of the
picture must be accompanied by text that indicates the picture is copyrighted.
RE:>>You don't see anyone go to a commercial site and steal photos for
their site and they
shouldn't steal from the library.
Some may have completely missed my point that putting together a "public
display" of photos, in digital format is similar to people investing hours,
weeks, and months into software development and then having to make a decision
whether they are going to freely share that work. As soon as you
post it to the net, unless you make it clear that the work is NOT being
submitted into the public domain by properly identifying the work as copyrighted
(see #1 above), the poster has just said, "Here. Enjoy my work. I
like to share and want all to enjoy!"
I'm NOT in favor of people using other people's work without permission.
I contact people to request permission if I want to use their photos,
and I have also contacted several people to see if they have photographic
works for sale. (CB gave me permission to use six pictures last year.
They ALL have copyright info affixed onto the surface of the picture.
The text is black so it really does not detract from the beauty of the
Unfortunately, I have not found any photographers that are willing to
take the time to commercialize their product. So, this made me purchase
my own camera and go into competition against them. Isn't that an
interesting twist? I HAVE, however, found quite a few photographers
that do not take the time to adequately inform the public that they are
NOT making these pictures freely available for others to enjoy. For
same there is no protection under this new "complex piece of legislation
which makes major changes in U.S. copyright law to address the digitally
networked environment" (enacted Oct 12, 1998).
The onus of responsibility for protection is with the OWNER of
the copyright, not those who might otherwise interpret the artist as performing
a philanthropic activity, as is being done with software being distributed
under the GNU/GPL license.
Again, I am NOT advocating use of others works without permission.
I'm just trying to alert people as to what they need to do if they want
to protect their property rights. I don't know if a lawyer in copyright
law ever reads these posts, but maybe one with some expertise in this arena
might comment. IN the meantime, checking this site http://www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/band.html
might prove helpful.
Protect your work if you want it to be protected. That is the
#1 Plantsman at http://hostahaven.com
1250 41st St
Des Moines, IA 50311-2516