| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 2,067 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1541 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
380 Posts |
thank you for sharing this information.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1529 Posts |
Thanks shatsi...as a collector who posts quite a lot of photos, I have found this article to be both interesting and informative. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2884 Posts |
Shatsi, very informative. Thanks for posting it. I have saved it to my favorites for reference! Mike |
|
Valued Member
United States
218 Posts |
I think you missed the last line shatsi! quote:
Originally posted by Andrew McIntyre in the linked article
Note : The author of [the] above article is not a lawyer and nor should the article be construed as legal advise. (February 2006)
This article is the opinion of one legal amateur and I'd be very hesitant to follow it's advice since most photographers will claim a legal copyright over their pictures, regardless of the nature of the object(s) in the photos. Maybe he's right, but are you really willing to risk a copyright infringement lawsuit to find out? my 2¢ Chris |
|
Forum Dad
 United States
24170 Posts |
quote:
This article is the opinion of one legal amateur and I'd be very hesitant to follow it's advice since most photographers will claim a legal copyright over their pictures, regardless of the nature of the object(s) in the photos. Maybe he's right, but are you really willing to risk a copyright infringement lawsuit to find out?
I am much more confident that this is true now. Wikipedia, which is huge and I'm sure has lawyers, has adopted this policy. See here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:..._Quarter.pngWhile they do still give credit as a courtesy, they make it very clear that the photo is not copyrighted. Under this photo it says... quote:
A 1796 Draped Bust, Small Eagle quarter. This photo was provided by Ira & Larry Goldberg Coins as part of an auction catalog, and was taken from CoinFacts.com.
Then under that that say... quote:
The image above depicts a unit of currency issued by the United States of America. The design is ineligible for copyright, and is therefore in the public domain. Fraudulent use of this image is punishable under applicable counterfeiting laws.
Now "Fraudulent use of this image is punishable under applicable counterfeiting laws." only means that you're in trouble if you use the image to facilitate making counterfeits. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1091 Posts |
Do we live in a land of freedom? Do excessive amount of laws about what we must do and what we cannot do infringe on our own liberty? I suppose that if I used your photo on a cover of a book and made millions of dollars, you might want a share. But that is not likely to happen. It is all about money. Having to put disclaimers on just about everything, giving credit to others for fear of being sued to me is just plain silly and bothersome.  The above statement is the opinion of the author and in no way reflects the opinion of this Forum. Credit is given to Miss Cealo (My third grade teacher) for the help she gave me years ago with spelling and grammar. Futher credit is given to Microsoft (tm) spelling and grammar program. Edited by toast
03/14/2006 5:27 pm
|
|
Forum Kid
Kuwait
1523 Posts |
The world is running head first into a wall right now.
With Law we have a pillow on our face while running towards the wall, without it we'll be running straight into it!
|
|
Valued Member
United States
421 Posts |
One thing to remember is that it may cost you to defend that position if someone wants to try it against you. ;) Wikipedia, if nothing else, can probably fall back on Fair Use in most cases.
My own opinion, as not a lawyer, is that coin pictures take expertise, skill and a touch of art and creativity to get a good one and I think someone could argue that in the right copyright case. Think of taking a picture of a person. You adjust lighting and positioning of the subject to get the right effect, etc. The person isn't copyrighted but the picture is.
Throwing a coin on a scanner is probably a diferent matter, IMHO, as it is more of a rote reproduction. But, of course, this is the legal system we are talking about and it is a risky thing. And, it can be an expensive risky thing at that even if you win. ;)
My own policy has to always get permission if I am using a picture on one of my sites. Not only do I think it is safer for me but I think it is also the right thing to do ethically.
Edited by Stujoe
03/15/2006 9:49 pm
|
|
Forum Dad
United States
24170 Posts |
I agree with you Stujoe. I think they should require permission to use. I mean I have a ton of time, trial and error, and money invested in the quality of my photos. To have someone just be able to take them legally rubs me the wrong way.
Also, I have found that if you ask, at least so far, they always say yes. I have asked some very big name dealers to use their photos on this site with a credit link under them and so far not one has said no. I have literally thousands of photos on my computer from them waiting to be posted on the site. Just takes a long time, I'm only one guy doing it. [:p]
|
|
Valued Member
United States
421 Posts |
I have had the same kind of experience when asking to use photos. Collector, dealer or firm, I never had anyone I aksed tell me 'no'.
One other thing of note, I think, is that this hobby, especially ont he internet, is a relatively small community and sometimes it seems that everyone knows everyone. It is best not to burn bridges over something like pictures. ;)
|
|
Forum Dad
United States
24170 Posts |
quote:
It is best not to burn bridges over something like pictures. ;)
Yep. Agreed again.  |
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 2,067 |
|
Posted 02/15/2006 5:36 pm
