: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 11:00 PM
To: 'Museum Computer Network Listserv'
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] IP SIG - orphan works question
Amalyah Keshet
I agree entirely with Peter, who has answered this question far more
elegantly than I could.
We never think twice about using the phrase (c) the artist
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv
Subject: [MCN-L] IP SIG - orphan works question
When due diligence has been done to find a copyright holder, and the decision
has been made to classify a work as an orphan work, is a museum still required
to place a (c) the artist statement when reproducing
Listserv
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] IP SIG - orphan works question
Since orphan works legislation has not passed, classifying a work as an orphan
work has no legal significance: it is purely an internal administrative matter.
And consequently, there is no requirement about how to label things - it is up
Amalyah Keshet
I agree entirely with Peter, who has answered this question far more
elegantly than I could.
We never think twice about using the phrase (c) the artist as a default,
if that's the only
information or best guess we have, or if the artist or copyright owner
doesn't answer our
-0400
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] IP SIG - orphan works question
Amalyah Keshet
I agree entirely with Peter, who has answered this question far more
elegantly than I could.
We never think twice about using the phrase (c) the artist as a default,
if that's the only
information or best
-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf
Of Peter B. Hirtle
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 12:27 PM
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] IP SIG - orphan works question
Since orphan works legislation has not passed, classifying a work as
an orphan work has no legal significance
When due diligence has been done to find a copyright holder, and the
decision has been made to classify a work as an orphan work, is a museum
still required to place a (c) the artist statement when reproducing
the work? (artist death date 2005)
Thanks
Cathryn
