Photo Ownership

[Fred W. Schneider III]

You were given permission to use my material and I either took the pictures I
have given you or have rights to them.   I truly appreciate, Bob, the fact that
you asked first.  I have never refused anyone who asked first.

I don't really know how you protect yourself other than by being damn careful.
When I was doing the PCC books, Warren Miller offered to let me use anything he
had from the Barney Neuberger collection ... I turned him down because it would
be almost impossible to verify ownership.

The copyright law changed since I edited Headlights.  In those days, you had to
file a print with the Library of Congress to get seven years, and renew for
another seven.  In the early 1980s, it was changed to the life of the
photographer or artist plus 50 years unless sold or given away.  The stipulation
that a print had to first be filed with the LofC changed to a looser policy that
filing it might help you prove a case, but it didn't necessarily mean you
couldn't later prove ownership rights if you failed to file the print.  It
apparently applies to all original work no matter who owns it ... if you send a
slide to Kodak that has a copywriter notice on it, even if original and in the
original mount, Kodak will not make a print or duplicate slide from it without a
letter absolving them of all responsibility.  If I understand the law correctly,
individuals are now allowed to make a copy for their own private noncommercial
purposes, which was not allowed under the old law.  Example, you don't want to
schmutz up a good print on the workbench, so you make copies to guide you in
building a model trolley.  That's legal.

>From a practical standpoint, Bob, your liability is probably determined by the
financial ability of the aggrieved party to take it through a Federal court.
Remember, it is a Federal law.   To win, you will probably have to prove a
monetary loss.  If you had no books in print or in production that would suffer
by someone else's plagiarism, you probably have nothing to sue for.  And very
few people would spend $10,000 to sue to recover $200.



"Dietrich, Robert J." wrote:

> Gentlemen:
>
> This discussion has me pondering the contents of my SHJ site.  I started
> putting together the "Cars that passed by" page and since I don't have many
> pictures myself I rely on web content.  My method is not to copy the
> pictures but to reference the original photo from within my web page.  That
> way the photo on Dave's site appears in my web page, with my comments.
>
> I'm being diligent in assuring that I give due credit but as you all know
> Dave's Rail Pix has many photos without credits.  So should I reference
> those photos?  They are already posted and available to anyone who goes to
> Dave's site, I'm just pointing to them.
>
> Dave has already given me permission to use anything on his site but I
> realize he doesn't always obtain proper permission.  So what should I do?
>
> I also have a PRCo poster from about 1940 introducing the PCC.  It contains
> photos of representative cars from the first horse car to the latest low
> floor car.  I was going to scan and use these photos referencing the poster
> as a source.  Is this right or wrong?  This publishing stuff is all new to
> me and I want to do the right thing, so please help.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bob
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Kenneth and Tracie Josephson [mailto:kjosephson at sprintmail.com]
> Sent:   Tuesday, June 27, 2000 6:22 PM
> To:     pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
> Subject:        Re: Photo Ownership
>
> Jim Holland wrote:
>
> > Greetings!
> >
> >         I have purchased PRCo prints from a multitude of sources and
> received
> > the same identical print from several different sources.  And each of
> > these prints was made from a negative - and the prints were not copies
> > of another print - these are readily identified.
> >         So it is possible that there was more than one photographer at the
> same
> > location snapping photos and very possibly it was some type of railfan
> > excursion.  Even the photo that Fred thinks is his own could be the
> > print of another photographer who was at the same location - but there
> > may be special identifying features where Fred can identify his photo.
>
> Case in point: You and I were standing together at Clearview Loop snapping
> pictures
> in 1976 and were also near each other at SHJ earlier in the day.
>
> Plus the beautiful night shot Roberta Hill took on November 13, 1971 of a
> PAT grey
> 1700 on the last 44 Knoxville run on Smithfield Street (followed by a 1600
> interurban and two more cars) is nearly identical to another shot published
> during
> the 1970s (though that could be Roberta's shot since her notes on the back
> indicate
> she had several 8 X 10s made for friends.)
>
> >
> >         Think we have been thru this before and are well versed about
> posting
> > the work of others.    NO  ONE  HERE  is guilty of posting Fred's work
> > --  the finger pointing needs to be done elsewhere!
>
> Fred cc'd a letter he wrote to Dave Mewhinney to this list.
>
> I am frustrated because I have a number of Pittsburgh, Philly and DC prints
> that
> are not featured on Dave's site by anyone else. Since the photographers did
> not
> identify themselves on the back of the prints, I can't share these pictures
> on the
> web site. I have no way of knowing who (if anyone) currently owns the
> rights.
>
> I have an unidentified shot of retired Pittsburgh Lowfloors being torched, a
> shot
> of a Lowfloor going through a car washer (oops, leak detection unit-
> Pittsburgh
> never washed their cars) and even the familiar 1920s print of the trolley
> meeting
> the Sarah Street horsecar. I believe (but may be wrong) the latter shot
> belongs to
> PTM's library, but the photographers of  the other two are unknown to me.
> Ken J.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dementix.org/pipermail/pittsburgh-railways/attachments/20000628/0e9aae2f/attachment.html