Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/07/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......
From: pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig)
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 21:08:52 +0100
References: <7978603.1436306827582.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <54505E90-C6EC-4D1A-B62E-60DE203F17E0@frozenlight.eu> <559D0734.1070607@summaventures.com> <AF7C3012-25DC-4B7A-A6B5-6ABE743C3DB0@earthlink.net> <5CAF72D6-1602-440B-8442-567AD42260EB@frozenlight.eu>

I agree. I have a copy of V1 no 1 - somewhere! I wasn't disagreeing with 
either
of you merely pointing out its possible historical worth and the tension that
results between that and copyright law (which I believe in Germany, would 
imply
copyright for 25 years from date of first publication - which all goes to
highlight the need for common agreement)

Peter

On 08/07/2015 18:05, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
> This was my point, too. We always get worked up over theft of someone?s 
> picture, whether commercial or not, so we should not condone copyright 
> infringement in other contexts either.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nathan
> 
> Nathan Wajsman
> 
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
> 
> Cycling: http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/belgiangator
> 
> YNWA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 08 Jul 2015, at 16:04, Bryan Caldwell <bcaldwell51 at earthlink.net> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I did some checking (I?m an attorney) and much of this material is 
>> subject to a U.S. Copyright of 95 years without having to be renewed. 
>> Whether or not they are of historical significance is legally irrelevant, 
>> just as whether they are still in print is irrelevant. It is the 
>> copyright holder?s choice as to what is done with them. If the copyright 
>> holder chose to destroy them they would be completely entitled to do so.
>>
>> ?Fair use? is a term of art in copyright law. Two things that argue 
>> strongly against this falling within the fair use exception is that the 
>> works are reproduced in their entirety and that they are posted for 
>> download to all comers. My strong suspicion is that this would not fall 
>> within the fair use exception. Any disclaimer accompanying the downloads 
>> is meaningless.
>>
>> Another way to look at this is to ask yourself how you would feel if 
>> someone gained access to your photographs and, without your permission, 
>> posted them to the world for download.
>>
>> There are some potential sub-issues here as well. I assume that Leica 
>> Fotographie obtained releases from the photographers whose work is 
>> involved (as well as those photographers obtaining release from their 
>> subjects) and those releases may have been for limited use - a single 
>> publication, for instance. This current use may not just be infringing 
>> upon Leica Fotographie?s copyright, but against the copyright holders of 
>> the content within.
>>
>> As much as I would like to, I will not be downloading any of this.
>>
>> Bryan Caldwell
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 

-- 

===========================================================
Dr Peter Dzwig                          



In reply to: Message from bcaldwell51 at earthlink.net (Bryan Caldwell) ([Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......)
Message from nwajsman at gmail.com (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......)
Message from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......)
Message from bcaldwell51 at earthlink.net (Bryan Caldwell) ([Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......)
Message from nwajsman at gmail.com (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Leica Fotographie Magazine downloads......)