Re: filmscanners: Importance of Copyright on Images

[Anthony Atkielski]

Harvey writes:

> I cannot/will not get into a discussion of business
> practices, but suffice it to say, that the fees
> generated from licensing web images are more than
> worth our time and effort.

Then you are most likely a fortunate exception to the rule.

> Again, I maintain that saying that an image on
> a web search engine 'might' be copyrighted is
> misleading, when, more than likely, it *is*
> copyrighted.

I agree, as I have said in a separate post.  However, I'm not opposed to
including the images in thumbnail form in search engines, with pointers to the
real thing.

> Perhaps they should, on every page, of every search,
> have a paragraph about copyrights.

People who steal images are usually either too unethical or too stupid to follow
the rules.  In either case, it isn't usually a question of ignorance, and so
putting a paragraph of explanation on a site probably won't make any difference.

> It would not take much effort on their part, and
> go a long way to alleviate the ..."Oh, I thought
> it was in the public domain' excuse.

The public domain, like fair use, is very widely understood, but I suspect that
the misunderstanding is often quite deliberate.