Comments on: Most Antique Images Are in the Public Domain http://blog.classyarts.com/most-antique-images-are-in-the-public-domain/ Photohistory and Artists Sun, 01 Jan 2012 22:25:38 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: ajmorris http://blog.classyarts.com/most-antique-images-are-in-the-public-domain/comment-page-1/#comment-44 ajmorris Sun, 27 Feb 2011 22:55:09 +0000 http://blog.classyarts.com/?p=51#comment-44 AC: What you are creating is called a derivative work under copyright -- look up that term with the word copyright and you will find the rules that apply -- basically they say you can not copyright the part of the work that derived from the public domain, but you can copyright your own contribution/modifications. Just how that concept applies to a woodcut is a great question, let us know if you find a good answer. WW: The copyright holder is the only person who can object -- supposedly one must exist (or existed), but there is no way to know who it might be. They would have to be able to prove their ownership (which might be through inheritance), which seems improbable in 99.99% of cases, but if you are publishing the image in a book or something like that, the publishers lawyers would probably object to the .01% possible problem... Seems a very stupid system, but that is how it works. AC: What you are creating is called a derivative work under copyright — look up that term with the word copyright and you will find the rules that apply — basically they say you can not copyright the part of the work that derived from the public domain, but you can copyright your own contribution/modifications. Just how that concept applies to a woodcut is a great question, let us know if you find a good answer.

WW: The copyright holder is the only person who can object — supposedly one must exist (or existed), but there is no way to know who it might be. They would have to be able to prove their ownership (which might be through inheritance), which seems improbable in 99.99% of cases, but if you are publishing the image in a book or something like that, the publishers lawyers would probably object to the .01% possible problem… Seems a very stupid system, but that is how it works.

]]> By: WW http://blog.classyarts.com/most-antique-images-are-in-the-public-domain/comment-page-1/#comment-42 WW Sat, 19 Feb 2011 22:22:57 +0000 http://blog.classyarts.com/?p=51#comment-42 If copyright of an anonymous photo extends for 120 years after creation, who controls the copyright during that time, and who can legally object to its unauthorized use? The owner of the print (even if he is not the photographer)? If copyright of an anonymous photo extends for 120 years after creation, who controls the copyright during that time, and who can legally object to its unauthorized use? The owner of the print (even if he is not the photographer)?

]]> By: AC http://blog.classyarts.com/most-antique-images-are-in-the-public-domain/comment-page-1/#comment-40 AC Thu, 10 Feb 2011 02:22:30 +0000 http://blog.classyarts.com/?p=51#comment-40 This site was is very helpful, thanks! But if I take that photograph and make a woodcut from it, is that covered under copyright law? what if I use a picture of a print (not a photograph) made in the 1700's? I've tolled the web for hours and haven't had any luck! This site was is very helpful, thanks! But if I take that photograph and make a woodcut from it, is that covered under copyright law? what if I use a picture of a print (not a photograph) made in the 1700’s? I’ve tolled the web for hours and haven’t had any luck!

]]> By: lauramc http://blog.classyarts.com/most-antique-images-are-in-the-public-domain/comment-page-1/#comment-34 lauramc Mon, 01 Nov 2010 05:39:38 +0000 http://blog.classyarts.com/?p=51#comment-34 A really fantastic article with details that are difficult to find elsewhere in easily understood language. Much, much needed information. A really fantastic article with details that are difficult to find elsewhere in easily understood language. Much, much needed information.

]]>