[WikiEN-l] Interesting article on restored copyrights in US works between...

[Ray Saintonge]

WJhonson at aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/14/2009 12:33:41 AM Pacific Standard Time,  
> dgerard at gmail.com writes:
>
> This  does not square with copyright law in any way. It's also arguable
> morally,  given their clear and blatant attempts to enclose the  public
> domain.>>
> ------------------------
> Copyright and Credit are two seperate items.  We need to discuss them  
> seperately.
> You don't Credit the Copyright holder.  You Credit your source, which  may or 
> may not be a copyright holder.
>  
> You credit where *you* got it from.  You even "Credit" public domain  sources 
> such as "the Monroe County courthouse" which holds no copyrights on  anything 
> whatsoever.
>  
> "Credit" doesn't need to know who holds the copyright, you are merely  
> stating what your own source was.  "Credit" has nothing to do with "Law",  it has to 
> do with "Normal scholarly citation methods"
>   
You are only right to a limited extent.  While it makes sense to say 
that a given picture was from the Corbis archives, acknowledging only 
that reinforces the notion that they have the proper copyrights.  If 
Corbis fails to give proper credit to its source that fact too needs to 
be noted.

Ec