On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:33 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
<<I see lots of stuff I know to be public domain in news media in particular that credits it to Corbis, Getty, etc. This happens even in very obvious cases, like US military photos of atomic tests.>>
Of course this is perfectly normal and in fact to do otherwise would be scandalous. IF you use my image, you had better give ME credit regardless of whether my image is of my toaster or the Taj Majal. The image belongs to me, and I give you permission to use it only if I'm credited, and not otherwise.
That's S.O.P. in the image world. Nothing to do with copyright. Seperate issue.
We were, I thought, talking of photos that Corbis does not own the rights to and never did, and is certainly not the creator of.
Copy of a copy of a copy and so on.... "Original" is usually a negative or print in some archive (the original "original" may be long gone). Many copies are often made of a single photo or image. In the case of photos from the early 20th century, you sometimes have many copies from an original negative or plate being distributed to various places and people, and various histories being recorded for each separate copy. If the original provenance is lost, it can sometimes appear that a single photo has several different claims of "ownership".
Carcharoth