Re: Photography and copyright laws...
- From: "=\(8\)" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:36:49 -0700
That however doesn't make the public domain. One can give away for free use their copyrighted work and still retain the copyright.
=(8)
"Sniper" <snipernest@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1177421769.758540.284150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I was under the impression that publicity stills are
public domain as they are produced for distribution to the public.
thanks
On Apr 22, 2:37 am, "=\(8\)" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:"Sniper" <snipern...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1177196509.933919.226280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Apr 21, 5:50 pm, David Dyer-Bennet <d...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Alfred Molon wrote:
>> > In article <200420072221076835%phi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> > phi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> >> Copyright law is fairly clear, so I suggest reading it yourself:
>> >>http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#103
> Thanks for the responses. On the same issue, today
> I was snooping around some online stock photography sites (alamy) and
> noticed one contributer who had about 38000 filmstillsonline!. What
> is the copyright situation with filmstills, are theypublicdomain?.
> If you watch amovieand make several screen grabs with software is
> the picture then your copyright?.
>> >>http://www.utsystem.edu/OGC/INTELLECTUALPROPERTY/distance.htm
>> >>http://fairuse.stanford.edu/commentary_and_analysis/2003_11_hirtle.html
>> >> If you read those URLs, you'll see I'm sending you to the US >> >> copyright
>> >> office, the University of Texas, and Stanford University, not
>> >> Wikipedia, answers.com, or other sources.
>> > These are the laws of one country out of over 160. It would be >> > better
>> > to
>> > post links to international laws and conventions.
>> Well; yes and no. You won't (can't) be prosecuted under those, you'll
>> be prosecuted under the law in some specific country. So that's the >> law
>> that really matters. Also, the case law, which is what establishes >> what
>> the words really mean, is all specific to one country or another.
I would guess that it would depend on the film. Really old silent's could be
in thepublicdomain.Stillsfrom Star Wars on the other hand I would be
would be a copyright violation. It is also important to know that some
movies are now privately owned and so if the person posting thestillsis
the owner then no problem. You would need more information. I would assume
that unless the stock house was just plain illegal that they have made sure
the images are kosher.
=(8)
.
- References:
- Re: Photography and copyright laws...
- From: Sniper
- Re: Photography and copyright laws...
- Prev by Date: Re: Merge to HDR?
- Next by Date: Re: How to remove diamond pattern from scanned image
- Previous by thread: Re: Photography and copyright laws...
- Next by thread: Re: Photography and copyright laws...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading