At 12:07 AM 7/22/2001 +1000, Rob Geraghty wrote:
>I note there's been some discussion of copyright lately. I just uploaded a
>stack of new pictures to my website, and it's taken quite a while to process
>them all. On the larger images I've put "(c) Rob Geraghty 2001" where the
>(c) is the proper
alf Of Stan McQueen
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
At 12:07 AM 7/22/2001 +1000, Rob Geraghty wrote:
>I note there's been some discussion of copyright lately. I just uploaded a
>stack of new pictures to my website
ces and the like are basically only for the honest
>and should not in and of themselves be regarded as practical protection
>against deliberate infringements - actual or potential.
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stan McQueen
&
"Stan McQueen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
> not arguing in opposition to registering the copyright on one's images.
What protection does registration with the *US* Copyright office offer if
the person who infringes your co
Laurie wrote:
>Like locks, copyright notices and the like are basically only for the
>honest and should not in and of themselves be regarded as practical
>protection against deliberate infringements - actual or potential.
I don't think anybody who's in or near the business can disagree with *t
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
"Stan McQueen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
> not arguing in opposition to registering the copyright on one's images.
What prot
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stan McQueen
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 9:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
not arguing in opposition to registering the
At 02:16 AM 7/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
> >not arguing in opposition to registering the copyright on one's images.
>
>Correct.
Then what are you arguing about? And why? I'm concerned that the effect of
your argument will
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:46:58 -0600 Stan McQueen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm concerned that the effect of
> your argument will be to convince people that it is not worthwhile to go
> to the effort of registering their images.
For the avoidance of doubt : in most countries except the US,
Canada has some type of half-butt registration system. I have never
been able to make much sense of it, or what value it has. I suspect, as
with most matter of government, they'd rather not be bothered with it
;-)
Art
Tony Sleep wrote:
>
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:46:58 -0600 Stan McQueen ([EMA
At 11:03 AM 7/23/2001 +0100, Tony Sleep wrote:
>For the avoidance of doubt : in most countries except the US, there is no
>concept of copyright registration. The fact of authorship is all that is
>required.
In the US, the difference between registering and not registering the
copyright is primar
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stan McQueen
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 5:47 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
At 02:16 AM 7/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >It's a little hard to tell from your post, but I'm assuming that you are
>
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
>
> I am arguing that people should not get their expectations up as to the
> nature of the protection that copyright registration provides, the ease of
> enforcement, the extent of the costs of insuring against copyright
> protection in terms of time and money, and what t
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 2:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright
LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
>
> I am arguing that people should not get their expectations up as to the
> nature of the protec
Stan wrote:
>What remedies are available in those countries that have no concept of
>copyright registration?
AFAIK you simply have to be able to establish that you originated the work.
With written material, a suggestion which I have received was to send a
copy of the work to yourself by regist
Stan, you may be correct in your belief that the US Copyright Office will
accept CDs as a deposit when registering photographs. All I can say is that
I was told otherwise when I talked to them via telephone. I just completed a
search of the Copyright Offices web site and couldn't find the answ
Here's a further hint on the acceptability of CDs of scanned images. Take a
look at http://www.loc.gov/copyright/fls/fl107.pdf (Registration of
Photographs). This indicates that "Two or more unpublished photographs may
be registered as a collection if: 1. The elements are assembled in an
orde
In a message dated 07/23/2001 9:47:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Stan wrote:
>What remedies are available in those countries that have no concept of
>copyright registration?
AFAIK you simply have to be able to establish that you originated the work.
With writ
Roger wrote:
> If the Copyright Office will accept CDs, many of us on
> this list would find if of great benefit since we already scan
> many of our photos and writing a CD is easier and cheaper than
> making contact sheets to send as a deposit.
If their guidelines say anything about file formats
Title: Re: filmscanners: Digital Copyright (off-topic) and Polaroid SS120 (on-topic)
> If I buy an SS120, can I have both it and
> the SS4000 connected at the same time so that I can use either one as the
> mood strikes me?
Yes! It is a simple matter of selecting in eithe
Rob, the copyright symbol in your notice should be followed immediately by
the year, not your name.
Stan, since when does the copyright office accept CDs for the required
deposit? I was specifically told when I called them (US Copyright Office)
about six months ago that they wouldn't accept
ly have to install two
copies of Silverfast or use one on PCI.
Greetings Preben
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 July 2001 05:43
Subject: Re: filmscanners: Digital
Copyright (off-topic) and Polaroid SS120 (on-topic)
Rob, the
Preben Kristensen wrote:
> AFA I recall from an earlier discussion on this list, it is not
> necessary to even to put a copyright notice - let alone the
> year on/under your photos - you automatically own the
> copyright to the images you create.
Provided you can establish that it is your image a
>Stan, since when does the copyright office accept CDs for the required
>deposit? I was specifically told when I called them (US Copyright Office)
>about six months ago that they wouldn't accept CDs. They are studying the
>issue of digital registration of copyrights (with a particular concern f
24 matches
Mail list logo
