|
|
Lucien Astor Special user Sunken R'lyeh 661 Posts |
|
necroloid Special user Kadar knows all and sees all of my 921 Posts |
Very nice showcase. Desperately waiting for these!
|
Christopher Gould Inner circle in special pants. 1029 Posts |
Very nice - must have cost a fortune on all those copy-writes too!
The Moon is now to be found in the constellation of Gemini:
https://www.geminiartifacts.com |
Joshua J Inner circle 1014 Posts |
Damm copyright getting in the way of me having a set of these
http://youtu.be/BMqLks7qnew You've chosen some nice images that do fit within traditional tarot, but not sure of legality of making a set. |
necroloid Special user Kadar knows all and sees all of my 921 Posts |
I thought That these were public domain due to the age of the paintings?
|
Lucien Astor Special user Sunken R'lyeh 661 Posts |
Hi Christopher,
I am interested in copyright and intellectual property, as I make my living as a visual artist. I was fairly sure of the ethical correctness of my actions, though not being a trained expert, I am willing to be properly educated. Many private and public art collections assert their right to claim copyright over works in the public domain, and consequently the privilege to charge licensing fees for their use. This is ridiculous, when you consider that, in my example, the works are predominately from the 15th and 16th centuries. This exact same issue was raised in the court case of Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corporation in 1999. Corel had commercially used photographs pf renaissance paintings, from the collection of the Bridgeman Art Library, without permission. The Bridgeman sued Corel, and after the courts examined the precedents of both US copyright law and UK common law, the Bridgeman lost the case. The court decided that reproduced public domain images are not protected if the afore-mentioned reproductions are slavish or lacking originality. the Court noted: ''There is little doubt that many photographs, probably the overwhelming majority, reflect at least the modest amount of originality required for copyright protection.... But 'slavish copying', although doubtless requiring technical skill and effort, does not qualify.'' Exact copies of art historical images are ‘slavish copies’ that themselves lack originality, or a creative aura, and can not be copyrighted. Professor Tyler Ochoa, professor and co-director of the Center for Intellectual Property Law at Whittier Law School, had this cogent point to make, “Where the public does not have access to the original painting, the ONLY way it has to reproduce the painting itself is to reproduce a reproduction of it. Unless we hold that the Bridgeman photographs can be freely copied, the painting, as a practical matter, is not in the public domain.” Even if there is a moral gray area (which I don't think there is), I would vociferously condemn institutions who assert a right to indefinitely license/trademark/copyright our collective cultural properties. Copyright exists, in my mind, to protect a creator from being exploited while he lives, and to allow his estate to protect the work and reputation for a period after the creators death. I believe that our shared cultural history belongs to us all, to do with what we will. It seems that the US courts and UK common law agree with me. But I do concede the fact that maybe my interpretation is incorrect, so I am open to being informed by other opinions. PS. I have a bunch of Alchemy Moon stuff and love it! |
Paul Prater Elite user North Little Rock, AR 483 Posts |
I don't want to hijack the thread, nor is this to the construed as legal advice. However, I would like to point out that Bridgeman is one case decided by a New York federal court. It is not binding on other courts, nor has it been cited or relied on by circuits throughout the US. It has no precedential value in the UK. Therefore, relying on this one case is dangerous. As a counterpoint, several courts have held differently. This one got more press, precisely because it did hold differently than the majority in the past.
I have represented someone in a copyright infringement case and it can be very expensive. If you want to see a legal article on why Bridgeman is wrong, check out the link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49144596/Copyr......rt-Allan I am not weighing in on whether Bridgeman is right or wrong, but I will keep it short by saying that this is by no means a settled area of law. |
Lucien Astor Special user Sunken R'lyeh 661 Posts |
Interesting, Paul. The Bridgeman case is a fascinating example that I see as an augury of further issues that will continue to multiply in the digital age. I raised the example partly to answer questions about whether the images had been licensed, but mainly to defend myself against what I felt was a snide inference about my ethics and character.
|
necroloid Special user Kadar knows all and sees all of my 921 Posts |
I say make them until if/when a C&D order comes. At that point you can decide if you want to challenge it.
|
Christopher Gould Inner circle in special pants. 1029 Posts |
I was not being snide - I had assumed that you had looked into the matter, as most of these images were corpyrighted by the galleries that hold them, this is certainly the case if your were to use them in a book.
I am not saying that the law is morally right, nor am I challenging your ethics. I am just urging caution. These are really nice images for a tarot and I wish you all the best in this venture, I really do.
The Moon is now to be found in the constellation of Gemini:
https://www.geminiartifacts.com |
Lucien Astor Special user Sunken R'lyeh 661 Posts |
OK, thanks Christopher.
Cheers, Darcy Logan |
necroloid Special user Kadar knows all and sees all of my 921 Posts |
Just a heads up for anybody looking for this I have one for sale below
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The spooky, the mysterious...the bizarre! » » Liber Secreta Sapientiae Tarot (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |