Click Official ELI Links
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support | ELI Legal Representation Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.

Author Topic: Some weekend food for thought.....  (Read 4267 times)

Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)

  • ELI Defense Team Member
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
    • ExtortionLetterInfo
Some weekend food for thought.....
« on: August 05, 2011, 03:56:51 PM »
I just came across this lilttle tidbit, which naturally, jump starts my brain with questions...

I see people state " The image did not have copyright or the symbol on it anywhere", now I know that this is not required, what I just learned ( unless I'm getting bad info) is that before 1989 it was required..So my questions are...

1. What is the likelyhood that GI has any images in their library from before 1989?

I'd venture to guess there are some..if not many GI has been around for quite a while

2. What is the likelyhood that GI took the proper steps to keep these images out of the public domain when the law changed??

Knowing that "supposedly" Getty does not register most of their images, I would think, they probably didn't take these steps either..

3. Could some of these images in their Letters actually be in the public domain??

What I just read from Public Domain Sherpa ~ http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/index.html
...."Although copyright notices are no longer required in the United States (as I mentioned above), they used to be. If the photograph was published before 1989, it needed a copyright notice. If it was published without one, it went into the public domain unless the copyright owner fixed the problem within a certain time.""

Thoughts, opinions, rebuttals??
Most questions have already been addressed in the forums, get yourself educated before making decisions.

Any advice is strictly that, and anything I may state is based on my opinions, and observations.
Robert Krausankas

I have a few friends around here..

Oscar Michelen

  • ELI Legal Warrior
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
    • View Profile
    • Courtroom Strategy
Re: Some weekend food for thought.....
« Reply #1 on: August 05, 2011, 04:24:05 PM »
I like that you're always thinking buddhapi. I think though that it is highly unlikely Getty has pre-1989 images as they would not have the kind of resolution that they sell on the site now, because any pre-1989 photos would be ones that were scanned in. . You would also have to prove that not only are they pre-1989 but that they also were  published somewhere without copyright notice.

Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)

  • ELI Defense Team Member
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
    • ExtortionLetterInfo
Re: Some weekend food for thought.....
« Reply #2 on: August 05, 2011, 05:30:20 PM »
I like that you're always thinking buddhapi. I think though that it is highly unlikely Getty has pre-1989 images as they would not have the kind of resolution that they sell on the site now, because any pre-1989 photos would be ones that were scanned in. . You would also have to prove that not only are they pre-1989 but that they also were  published somewhere without copyright notice.

Thanx for your input Oscar!, yes i'm always thinking, sometimes it can be a problem...

I thought about the scanning issue, and also the time frame...being the way I am I did a quick GI search for Mt Saint Helens which erupted in 1980..low and behold they have images of the eruption.. Given the fact that most of the images available are up to 300dpi, I think it's plausable..even low end and dated scanners could scan up to 1200dpi, which would allow room to scan, crop, clean and resize with little image degradation..


Another question comes to mind...so say I use an image of JFK thats in GI library, the photo is from 1963ish and there is no visable CMI, does this make it public domain? and what it GI obtained the same image in 1990 and scanned it what would happen to the copyright then, does it become a new work when it is scanned..I think i need medication!
Most questions have already been addressed in the forums, get yourself educated before making decisions.

Any advice is strictly that, and anything I may state is based on my opinions, and observations.
Robert Krausankas

I have a few friends around here..

SoylentGreen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Re: Some weekend food for thought.....
« Reply #3 on: August 05, 2011, 08:16:53 PM »
Great research by buddhapi!!

I think that part of Getty's "weaponry" is that it's difficult to be sure of the status of the vast majority of images out there.
That makes it difficult to fight back.

Common sense makes the average person expect the that the party claiming damages would send conclusive evidence with the demands.
But, demand letter victims are often made to feel that they must prove their "innocence" in the face of evidence that is often withheld, or very difficult to track down.

S.G.

Jerry Witt (mcfilms)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
    • Motion City
Re: Some weekend food for thought.....
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2011, 10:16:12 PM »
Dang buddhapi... you're smart!

That was a great bit of sleuthing and one of the reasons I love checking in on this board. Awesome work.
Although I may be a super-genius, I am not a lawyer. So take my scribblings for what they are worth and get a real lawyer for real legal advice. But if you want media and design advice, please visit Motion City at http://motioncity.com.

Oscar Michelen

  • ELI Legal Warrior
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
    • View Profile
    • Courtroom Strategy
Re: Some weekend food for thought.....
« Reply #5 on: August 06, 2011, 01:13:30 PM »
On the JFK issue, it will depend on when the photo was first published.  Here is the copyright offices description of how long copyright lasts:

The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found in Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.

Works created on or after January 1, 1978, are not subject to renewal registration. As to works published or registered prior to January 1, 1978, renewal registration is optional after 28 years but does provide certain legal advantages. For information on how to file a renewal application as well as the legal benefit for doing so, see Circular 15, Renewal of Copyright, and Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright.

 

Official ELI Help Options
Get Help With Your Extortion Letter | ELI Phone Support Call | ELI Defense Letter Program
Show your support of the ELI website & ELI Forums through a PayPal Contribution. Thank you for supporting the ongoing fight and reporting of Extortion Settlement Demand Letters.