An eBay vendor is exploiting a volunteer restoration of the Holocaust.
Another volunteer at Commons first spotted it.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Durova#Photo_on_ebay
Warsaw Ghetto Uprising eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/1943-WWII-WARSAW-GHETTO-UPRISING-Jurgen-Stroop-Photo_W0Q... Restored: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprisin... Unrestored: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprisin...
Going through their online store revealed a dozen more of my restorations for sale, all without credit. Other featured picture contributors may want to review the vendor's collection to see whether their work is also being exploited. I also confirmed items in this vendor's collection that are copyrighted to the NAACP and Walt Disney Coporation. Made relevant phone calls this afternoon.
http://cgi.ebay.com/GEORGE-WASHINGTON-MOUNT-RUSHMORE-CONSTRUCTION-Photo_W0QQ... Mount Rushmore
http://cgi.ebay.com/1910s-VERNON-IRENE-CASTLE-Ballroom-Dancing-Photo_W0QQite... Vernon and Irene Castle
http://cgi.ebay.com/LUDWIG-VAN-BEETHOVEN-German-Composer-Death-Mask-Photo_W0... Beethoven
http://cgi.ebay.com/1911-HELENE-DUTRIEU-Female-Aviation-Pioneer-Photo_W0QQit... Helene Dutrieu
http://cgi.ebay.com/1873-NAVAJO-DINE-NATIVE-AMERICAN-INDIANS-NM-Photo_W0QQit... Navajo family
http://cgi.ebay.com/1900S-RAMALLAH-WOMAN-Palestinian-Costume-Photo_W0QQitemZ... Ramallah woman
http://cgi.ebay.com/1882-OSCAR-WILDE-Irish-Playwright-Portrait-Photo-3_W0QQi... Oscar Wilde
http://cgi.ebay.com/1879-CHARLES-ROBERT-DARWIN-Portrait-Photo_W0QQitemZ20038... Charles Darwin
http://cgi.ebay.com/1916-LOUIS-DEMBITZ-BRANDEIS-Portrait-Photo_W0QQitemZ2003... Louis Brandeis
http://cgi.ebay.com/1943-TYPHOID-VACCINATION-DOCTOR-SCHOOL-GIRL-Photo_W0QQit... Typhoid vaccination
http://cgi.ebay.com/1941-PEARL-HARBOR-HAWAII-USS-WEST-VIRGINIA-RESCUE-Pic_W0... USS West Virginia
http://cgi.ebay.com/WWII-1945-US-Army-63rd-DIVISION-WALDENBURG-Photo_W0QQite... Waldenburg, Germany
-Durova
Durova wrote:
An eBay vendor is exploiting a volunteer restoration of the Holocaust.
Another volunteer at Commons first spotted it.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Durova#Photo_on_ebay
Warsaw Ghetto Uprising eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/1943-WWII-WARSAW-GHETTO-UPRISING-Jurgen-Stroop-Photo_W0Q... Restored: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprisin... Unrestored: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprisin...
Going through their online store revealed a dozen more of my restorations for sale, all without credit. Other featured picture contributors may want to review the vendor's collection to see whether their work is also being exploited. I also confirmed items in this vendor's collection that are copyrighted to the NAACP and Walt Disney Coporation. Made relevant phone calls this afternoon.
http://cgi.ebay.com/GEORGE-WASHINGTON-MOUNT-RUSHMORE-CONSTRUCTION-Photo_W0QQ... Mount Rushmore
http://cgi.ebay.com/1910s-VERNON-IRENE-CASTLE-Ballroom-Dancing-Photo_W0QQite... Vernon and Irene Castle
http://cgi.ebay.com/LUDWIG-VAN-BEETHOVEN-German-Composer-Death-Mask-Photo_W0... Beethoven
http://cgi.ebay.com/1911-HELENE-DUTRIEU-Female-Aviation-Pioneer-Photo_W0QQit... Helene Dutrieu
http://cgi.ebay.com/1873-NAVAJO-DINE-NATIVE-AMERICAN-INDIANS-NM-Photo_W0QQit... Navajo family
http://cgi.ebay.com/1900S-RAMALLAH-WOMAN-Palestinian-Costume-Photo_W0QQitemZ... Ramallah woman
-Durova
http://cgi.ebay.com/1882-OSCAR-WILDE-Irish-Playwright-Portrait-Photo-3_W0QQi... Oscar Wilde
http://cgi.ebay.com/1879-CHARLES-ROBERT-DARWIN-Portrait-Photo_W0QQitemZ20038... Charles Darwin
http://cgi.ebay.com/1916-LOUIS-DEMBITZ-BRANDEIS-Portrait-Photo_W0QQitemZ2003... Louis Brandeis
http://cgi.ebay.com/1943-TYPHOID-VACCINATION-DOCTOR-SCHOOL-GIRL-Photo_W0QQit... Typhoid vaccination
http://cgi.ebay.com/1941-PEARL-HARBOR-HAWAII-USS-WEST-VIRGINIA-RESCUE-Pic_W0... USS West Virginia
http://cgi.ebay.com/WWII-1945-US-Army-63rd-DIVISION-WALDENBURG-Photo_W0QQite... Waldenburg, Germany
These works are Public Domain. Anyone can use them without credit. Since your restoration work did not add any additional copyright, there is no requirement even to credit Wikimedia Commons.
While the project can request that reusers credit you for these works, we certainly cannot demand it.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Cary Bass cary@wikimedia.org wrote:
These works are Public Domain. Anyone can use them without credit. Since your restoration work did not add any additional copyright, there is no requirement even to credit Wikimedia Commons.
While the project can request that reusers credit you for these works, we certainly cannot demand it.
With most of the restorations we have, including Durova's, there isn't any indication on the file page that the restorationist would like credit, or even that the restoration was done by the uploader. One way to give a strong hint to those who want to use or sell the images would be to add a note about the restoration in either the source or author field. "Author: Unknown. Restoration by Durova" or like. If I came to one of the restorations and wasn't familiar with how commons works already, I would have no clue that anyone would expect or want me to credit the restorationist.
If someone really, really wants credit, then depending on what an individual restoration entails and how much subjective judgment goes into it, it might even be plausible to classify restorations as derivative works and say "Original is PD, restoration is a derivative work released under CC-by". Although that would likely be a bad precedent that blurs the lines between derivative works and "sweat-of-the-brow" copyright.
-Sage
Дана Wednesday 16 September 2009 00:26:18 Cary Bass написа:
These works are Public Domain. Anyone can use them without credit. Since your restoration work did not add any additional copyright, there is no requirement even to credit Wikimedia Commons.
Since restoring an image could include some amount of creativity, a restoration could be copyrightable. Certainly, there are people claiming copyright on digital restorations.
But since Durova didn't claim copyright on her restorations, didn't even mention herself anywhere on the image description page, and did mark the images as being in public domain, I don't see how could any reuser be held responsible for not mentioning her as the restorer.
(I have only looked at the image at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprisin... )
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Nikola Smolenski smolensk@eunet.yu wrote:
Дана Wednesday 16 September 2009 00:26:18 Cary Bass написа:
These works are Public Domain. Anyone can use them without credit. Since your restoration work did not add any additional copyright, there is no requirement even to credit Wikimedia Commons.
Since restoring an image could include some amount of creativity, a restoration could be copyrightable. Certainly, there are people claiming copyright on digital restorations.
<snip>
It is settled case law in the US that restorations are not copyrightable as they lack sufficient originality. The intent is to create a slavish copy of the original work. Even if it takes a great deal of skill and judgment to do that, there are insufficient grounds for copyright in the US system.
This may not be the case in other jurisdictions (such as the UK) which place a greater emphasis on effort in determining eligibility for copyright.
-Robert Rohde
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
It is settled case law in the US that restorations are not copyrightable as they lack sufficient originality. The intent is to create a slavish copy of the original work. Even if it takes a great deal of skill and judgment to do that, there are insufficient grounds for copyright in the US system.
This may not be the case in other jurisdictions (such as the UK) which place a greater emphasis on effort in determining eligibility for copyright.
-Robert Rohde
What case(s) settled this issue? I haven't been able to find anything credible one way or the other, but a number of organizations without an obvious financial interest in the issue seem to assume that restorations do create new copyrights.
-Sage
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:03 AM, Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
It is settled case law in the US that restorations are not copyrightable as they lack sufficient originality. The intent is to create a slavish copy of the original work. Even if it takes a great deal of skill and judgment to do that, there are insufficient grounds for copyright in the US system.
This may not be the case in other jurisdictions (such as the UK) which place a greater emphasis on effort in determining eligibility for copyright.
-Robert Rohde
What case(s) settled this issue? I haven't been able to find anything credible one way or the other, but a number of organizations without an obvious financial interest in the issue seem to assume that restorations do create new copyrights.
Hhmmmm. I may have been mistaken. I distinctly recall a case with a fact pattern directly on point, involving a copyright claim in a work that was restored via a restorer's technical skill and judgment to create a "reproduction" of a original master's work that had been degraded over time, and that the restorer was denied copyright. However, I am not able to locate such a case upon searching. I suppose I may be misremembering (or it is possible I am remembering a case that is not US).
For the US, I would say the logic of Bridgeman vs. Corel makes plain that technical skill in copying is insufficient for copyright; however, it is not directly on point since it didn't directly address the issue of restorations.
-Robert Rohde
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org