contact@robinschwab.ch wrote:
Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de hat am 21. Mai 2008 um 10:20 geschrieben:
Note that there is a difference between a work published anonymously, and a work whos author is unknown. Anonymous works are not problematic if the date of publication is known: copyright generally ends 70 years later. If the author is
AFAIK most countries don't have such a paragraph. Germany has one but even there the heirs can say it's the picture of their ancestor and then the 70 years p.m.a. applies.
Several countries do, including the US, afaik. But yes, post-factum authorship claims are a problem. However, some countries (including, according to Wikipedia, Switzerland buzt not Germany) have the rule that such claims must be made within 70 years of the anonymous publication. Sone once they are over, you would be safe.
Take the 228 years old newspaper NZZ in
...
They distribute it on its own, claiming you can use it for any purpose? really? got a link?
http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/medien/wsj_chefredaktor_1.739127.html Robert Thomsons image.
I see an low-res image used in editorial context, showing a person of interest, not something copyrighted on its own; this may be fair use (a pokemon shirt would be, under the same circumstances). The photo copytion sais "pd" without any explanation what is meant by that. Might even be the photographers initials, who knows. I can't see why this Image would be legally PD anyway.
-- Daniel