Re: [Leica] Re: Korda sues

[John Collier <jbcollier@home.com>]

Austin,

Give the turntable a whack, the record is skipping.

Thanks,

John Collier

> From: Austin Franklin <austin@darkroom.com>
> 
>> Whether you agree with it or not, that's the law in this country (the
>> U.S.)---freelance workers who create something original, even if someone
> is
>> compensating them for it, have the copyright to what was created, unless
>> they are bonafide employees (with salary, benefits, and all that other
> stuff
>> that freelancers have to take care of themsleves, usually at a much
> higher
>> cost than an organization has) of whoever they do the work for, or
> expressly
>> transfer all or part of their rights to the work. It's not unique to
>> photography, either. Writers, musicians, and other creative types have
> the
>> same rights to the work they create as independents. The design examples
> you
>> give (computers, toasters) are generally performed by *employees* of the
>> manufacturers, and copyright issues don't arise (although other
> intellectual
>> property issues often do). If a magazine or other publisher wants to
>> purchase all the rights to the work they commission, they can try to do
> so,
>> but it will cost more.
> 
> There is the copyright law it self, and there is the issue of who owns the
> copyright.  Two different issues.  I know how the current law is generally
> interpreted.  I disagree with that interpretation.  I do believe that
> copyrights should be upheld, so that is not what I have an issue with.  It
> is beyond my belief of what is 'fair' (and ethical), how someone can lay
> claim to work someone else gave them the idea for, supplied the materials,
> and paid them for.  It is obviously a different case for most editorial
> photographers, which I have no issue with, and I believe, why the law has
> been interpreted that way.  I do not believe a commercial photographer
> should be given the same 'rights', in this regard, as editorial or some
> other photography is.
> 
> Engineering contractors are used by most every technology company, and the
> contractors, routinely, do not retain ANY rights to their work, nor do they
> feel they should, and they are NOT employees in any way, shape or form.
> They are freelance contractors, as is any freelance photographer.
> Engineering can be equally as creative as any art is.
> 
> Imagine if you had to pay your landscaper every time you used your lawn.
> You paid him to do the work, so why should you pay him for the use of his
> work that he did FOR you after the fact?  He was creative in performing his
> 'art'.  He was not an employee...yet no landscaper in the world asks for
> 'use royalties'...
>