Thank you for your reply,
I asked the copyright office at Oxford University Press about a
similar situation and they informed me that when the manuscript is
public domain, the person/company that took the photographs of the
manuscript have the copyright of those images and following I
Not in the US.
The image remains PD here.
RT
Thank you for your reply,
I asked the copyright office at Oxford University Press about a
similar situation and they informed me that when the manuscript is
public domain, the person/company that took the photographs of the
manuscript have
All,
Robin's findings are correct. While the item is in the PD, the edited, cleaned
up images (which is what Minkoff provides) are not and require permission (even
in the US) from the claimant, who may or may not be Minkoff. If one has access
to a microfilm of a PD manuscript from a library,
Minkoff's images cannot claim to be cleaned up, considering their quality.
And photographic reproduction is PD, only EDITORIAL CONTENT is
copyrightable.
RT
- Original Message -
From: Jorge Torres torr...@lafayette.edu
To: Roman Turovsky r.turov...@verizon.net
Cc: ro...@rolfhamre.com;
Minkoff's images cannot claim to be cleaned up, considering their quality.
And photographic reproduction is PD, only EDITORIAL CONTENT is
copyrightable.
RT
- Original Message -
From: Jorge Torres torr...@lafayette.edu
To: Roman Turovsky r.turov...@verizon.net
Cc: ro...@rolfhamre.com;
On May 16, 2012, at 8:23 AM, R. Mattes wrote:
This is partly right and partly wrong - but first let's be
clear about what we talk here: the rights on the composition
(which most likely ended centuries ago :-) or the right of
the _image_ of the original work. Those remain with the owner
of
