Stan Shebs <stanshebs(a)earthlink.net> writes:
The Cunctator wrote:
On 1/25/07, Stan Shebs
<stanshebs(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
Okay, so what's the right tag?
Strictly speaking, you'd have to ask the owner of the photo. Given the
specifics of that crowd, it wouldn't surprise me if they were planning
to make money selling it. :-) In practice, it's probably a "fairusein",
enumerating the articles for which you plan to use it. Lack of the
actual photographer's name is going to be a problem - without that, no
guarantee I wouldn't hit it with a "no source" tag should I run across
it in future.
Nice to see you standing up for the rights of felons everywhere. :)
One never knows - haven't there been some convicted
writers/photographers who were ordered by the court to sell their work
so as to make restitutions from the proceeds?
Stan
Curiously enough, the Unabomber is contesting that right now:
<http://www.slate.com/id/2158220/>
,----
| Does the government get the copyright when it seizes a prisoner's personal writings?
Some legal scholars think it does, although Kaczynski is arguing otherwise. Even if the
feds couldn't transfer the copyright on Kaczynski's writings, they'd probably
be able to sell them. That's because they're not trying to reproduce them;
instead, they're selling the papers as physical objects, along with other items he
owned.
`----
--
Gwern
Inquiring minds want to know.