[Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

[teun spaans]

I checked three mid 20th century dutch epaper encyclopedias:
kleine oosthoek (about 60.000 articles)
winkler prins pocket encyclopedie (50000 articles)
None of them has something like citaatrecht / fair use mention with the
pictures, at the front of the book series or at the end of the books.
Sesam pocket encyclopedie (100000 articles) is no longer in my possession,
but I had looked this thing up before.

I must note that dutch citaatrecht is much ore limited than US "fair use".
For a book cover the law, reading it strictly, allows you to use it in an
article discussing the cover, but not with an article discussing the book.
The latter however seems to have grown into a habbit, so in Dutch courts
this might be considered an "acquired right", or it may not.

teun

On 1/31/07, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
> teun spaans wrote:
>
> >>I am curious if anybody who is a regular participant on this mailing
> >>list has ever come across an equivalent peer to Wikipedia (aka
> >>Britannica or a major website like cnn.com) that would use modern art
> >>works (I'm defining modern as created by anybody who has died since
> >>1924) and publish reproductions of them using fair-use as the only
> >>justification for their inclusion?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Not me. I have three paper encyclopedias, none of them mentions anything
> on
> >the source of photographs.
> >
> >
> Encyclopedias sometimes put photo credits on a page that is not
> necessarily adjacent to the article, but on some sort of "credits" page
> that is listed elsewhere.  Encyclopedia Brittanica used to acknowledge
> authorship of its artlces with just the author's initials, and it was
> only in the first volume that even listed the names of the authors.  At
> least this is something to look at before jumping to too much of a
> conclusion.
>
> Also, even if no source was explicitly mentioned, that reference is not
> strictly necessary for a photographic license.
>
> I know this is a tough thing to prove, but one really good example is
> all I'm asking for here.  The rationale for using such images is very
> weak if you can't find a clear example in other published media, proving
> that this is a bleeding edge copyright situation instead of common
> publishing industry practice.  While not perfect for a legal defense, it
> does help if you can show that others who might be peers have done this
> and nobody has cared.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>