It is undoubtedly the case that the heirs of Mrs. Channer own copyright to the photo in the book published in 1928. However, there appear to be some photo copies of patterns/prickings which are in the hands of Diana Trevor that do not have Miss Channer's name or mark on them and don't appear ever to have been published by her. In fact, they are not even exactly the same as the photo in the book. One may be part of a collection of patterns given by Pat Payne to the Alby museum, and one comes from the archive of Vi Bullard. Is there any reason to believe that the rights to these unpublished works are owned by her heirs? Is it possible to exert rights to a technical drawing, by publishing a photograph of an object, not having published or registered the original drawing? Devon In a message dated 1/7/2014 12:32:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, thelace...@btinternet.com writes:
It is the act of publishing that causes written work to be copyrighted and for craft it is the exhibition or selling of the work that copyrights this. From the research that I have seen this is the same for all legal systems based on the UK or European systems or which have origins in the UK system or European systems (such as The US and Australia) Certainly the fact that the pricking has been published would cause it to come under copyright. Creative works do not have to necessarily be published to fall under copyright protection. If I write a sing and play it to you and yeas later a major part of your song happens to be the same or reasonably similar to my original I can claim infringement. I have to prove earlier authorship and that you had access to my material. In addition there would be liability of your friend wrote a piece based on my work but had not head mine directly but had heard a version from you that you sang remembering mine. There would be a joint but not equal liability there. Imitation may be the best form of flattery but it also carries liability. By published a photograph of her work in the 1920s and it being clearly stated that she was they designer of the work, Miss Channer deminstrated copyright Kind Regards Liz Baker > On 7 Jan 2014, at 16:08, dmt11h...@aol.com wrote: > > Copyright law is different in the US versus Britain, and I don't know > anything about British copyright law. > Is it the case that Miss Channer went through the formal process of > copyrighting the design of the mat? If so at what date? > Devon - To unsubscribe send email to majord...@arachne.com containing the line: unsubscribe lace y...@address.here. For help, write to arachne.modera...@gmail.com. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/ - To unsubscribe send email to majord...@arachne.com containing the line: unsubscribe lace y...@address.here. For help, write to arachne.modera...@gmail.com. Photo site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lacemaker/sets/
