Hi Jimbo,
Le Saturday 4 June 2005 18:54, Jimmy Wales a écrit :
Soufron wrote:
> Don't you folks feel like we're
getting more and more stuff like this
> these days ?
Yes, I think we are.
The kind of case that I personally find most annoying are claims from
museums where the art underlying the photo has clearly been in the
public domain for a very long time. If I get one more like that, I'm
going to go on a rampage and make a lot of noise about it.
--Jimbo
Then you will have matters to complain with French administrations. ;o)
Did you heard about the French Academy claiming that their dictionaries are
all still copyrighted from the 1st edition published in the 17th century
because the people writing the dictionary are "immortels" ?
Then there is the French National Library (yes, the one complaining about
Google taking over the world) which claims copyright on their digital content
because there are, they claim, photographed, and not simply scanned, which is
IMHO quite spurious as the process for digitalization is automated. Also are
the archives of the French National Museums.
And I just learnt that according to Indian copyright law [1] all pictures are
in the public domain 60 years after the date of _publication_. Needless to
say that all Indian picture databases claim copyright of pictures up to the
19th century. See [2][3] as an example where the photographer claims
copyright for pictures he would have taken before his birth.
Yann
[1]
http://www.naukri.com/lls/copyright/section5.htm#25
[2]
http://www.gandhiserve.org/cgi-bin/if/imageFolio.cgi?action=view&link=P…
[3]
http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/our_photographers/vithalbhai_jhaveri…
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
