http://images.google.com/hosted/life
There is no directly copyright related metadata, but there is a "Date taken:" field.
1923 is the magic number, is that right?
cheers Brianna
Yes, exactly. Anything published in the US before January 1, 1923 is public domain.
Brianna Laugher wrote:
http://images.google.com/hosted/life
There is no directly copyright related metadata, but there is a "Date taken:" field.
1923 is the magic number, is that right?
cheers Brianna
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
2008/11/19 Michael Galpert | Aviary michael@aviary.com:
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
Really? I thought the published/unpublished distinction didn't affect that in US law.
(I'm sure someone has full legal details to hand ...)
- d.
2008/11/19 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
2008/11/19 Michael Galpert | Aviary michael@aviary.com:
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
Really? I thought the published/unpublished distinction didn't affect that in US law.
(I'm sure someone has full legal details to hand ...)
It is indeed *published* before 1923, though we've been a bit vague about confirming this in the past. There's a very useful table of such things here:
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
However, archives like these are still very useful - if it was made before 1923 for a news magazine, odds are high it were published quite promptly, and it's often a lot easier to take their image and confirm with a pre-1923 source than it is to ferret out the source and scan from scratch...
11/19 Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com:
2008/11/19 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
2008/11/19 Michael Galpert | Aviary michael@aviary.com:
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
Really? I thought the published/unpublished distinction didn't affect that in US law.
(I'm sure someone has full legal details to hand ...)
It is indeed *published* before 1923, though we've been a bit vague about confirming this in the past. There's a very useful table of such things here:
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
However, archives like these are still very useful - if it was made before 1923 for a news magazine, odds are high it were published quite promptly, and it's often a lot easier to take their image and confirm with a pre-1923 source than it is to ferret out the source and scan from scratch...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
It does unfortunately say on the front page that "Most were never published and are now available for the first time". I'm sure there's still some good stuff in there that was published though. (I have to admit I was unaware of the published/unpublished distinction too)
the wub
There are many useful pictures here.
- All taken before 1888 even if never published are in the public domain. - Published and taken before 1923. (note publication can be outside the US) - Published between 1923 and 1963 for which Time did not renew the copyright (unlikely) - All taken by authors who died before 1938 (however, Time doesn't identify the photographer that took the pictures which is unfortunate) - Additionally, I'm not sure that Google is using the term "unpublished" as defined in the Copyright Act of 1978. Published means part of a work offered for sale, or displayed with the intent to offer for sale even if never sold. For example, if the photographer sent the pictures to a group of persons (i.e. to multiple magazines) trying to sale them that would be publication (even though not offered to the public at large). Note that displayed with no intent to sale does NOT constitute publication. - Finally, my understanding is that if these pictures were incorporated into any television show that would be publication since the public was licensed to have a copy on their television during that television show, even though they may not have been authorized to keep a copy after the show itself.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:43 AM, the wub thewub.wiki@googlemail.com wrote:
11/19 Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com:
2008/11/19 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
2008/11/19 Michael Galpert | Aviary michael@aviary.com:
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
Really? I thought the published/unpublished distinction didn't affect that in US law.
(I'm sure someone has full legal details to hand ...)
It is indeed *published* before 1923, though we've been a bit vague about confirming this in the past. There's a very useful table of such things here:
http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/
However, archives like these are still very useful - if it was made before 1923 for a news magazine, odds are high it were published quite promptly, and it's often a lot easier to take their image and confirm with a pre-1923 source than it is to ferret out the source and scan from scratch...
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 4:44 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2008/11/19 Michael Galpert | Aviary michael@aviary.com:
dont think that applies across the board since some of these images are being published for the first time
Really? I thought the published/unpublished distinction didn't affect that in US law.
(I'm sure someone has full legal details to hand ...)