To Utah Josh,
It is wonderful that you are digitizing this material. It is also wonderful that it is available to researchers and writers
I do not mind paying for copies and the rights to use them in publication and always cite the institution and give thanks to the person who helped.
However, some institutions charge user fees that cannot be justified by a lowly researcher/writer. I get it. Museums and libraries are scrambling for revenues.
When an institution places them for free on the internet, where the images can be copied again and again, they are hurting their own cause.
It also undercuts the user who has paid for the privilege/right to use the image.
At one institution with high fees, I told them I simply could not afford to use their services. The curator kindly placed me in touch with a volunteer who copied the material for me. I paid her a flat rate for doing so. It was a win for the museum, for the volunteer, and for me.
I realize I am dumb, but you didn't need to say so. I now realize you are a marvelous gift to researchers and writers. Perhaps some institution will frame your portrait and surround it with blue ribbons.
Perhaps you can reimburse the high fees I paid for material that I can now get for free on the internet. So boo hoo to you if your buttocks get pained sitting in front of a computer screen scanning pics. I hope the attitude you have expressed here is not how you deal with customers and employees at the institution?
This site, like other forums has become filled with rancor and vile.

Seriously, who hurt you?

Ed,
I simply related some experiences I thought were related to this thread and got called dumb.
C'est la vie.

No, you also said this.



You said a bunch of obnoxious un-constructive things there.

I was wondering why you felt the need to lash out like that at straw men.

Ed,
That was partly in jest, but somewhat true.
The internet is filled with unattributed images or just images alone with no text or information to tell us what we are seeing. Many of those are just random strikes to gain a "thanks" on the site.
The researcher/writer spends untold hours producing a publication. He or she takes those same photos, often paid for, and gives them provenance and substance. Having said that, like the volunteer at a museum scanning images, it is a labour of love. The reward is in getting the material out for the public to enjoy.
In defense of a dummy like me, I am hoping to finish a writing project next year. It has involved nearly 30 years of gathering material. I have purchased historic photos and historic paper at antique shows, auction sales, and through eBay and other sources, often paying top dollar. I regard the original/historic photos I have bought as my property and expect that those using the book will honor that.
There will be thousands of hours of research and writing in the project.
The book will not be a money maker. Indeed, it will have cost a lot more than book sales will return. However, as said before, c'est la vie. That is my problem.
Perhaps Utah Josh thought I was referring to him with the fat asses comments. No. He has evidently worked hard to digitize images. if they get splashed all over the net without any thanks to him or his institution, that will be a shame, it truly will.
That's my simple story. I'll go back to my writing.

I'm blessed to have had an employer spend a couple of million bucks to set up a scene for me to record for history's sake. I consider myself to be lucky the employer - Uncle Sam - put the photo(s) in the public domain where over the years it has been on magazine covers, dozens of books and last I looked there about a hundred products - from tees to coffee cups - available on ebay that use one version or another of the photo(s).

Thirty years later, every object (ship/airplane) in the photo is gone, just like so much RR equipment. I often see the photo uploaded to FB groups, where almost always somewhere who served on those ships and planes provides a human story, if nothing more than "I was there."

Personally, if I upload an image I've taken to the Internet, I'm making a decision to release it into the public domain because I don't think there is any reasonable way to control it afterwards.

But if someone were to come to me and ask if they could use it in a publication, I'm going to consider the venue and decide what I want if I believe they are in it for a profit.

Bob

Just a quick note… “work for hire” is covered under copyright law. You’re considered an employee, whether directly or by contract. You don’t get the copyright.

Then there’s “fair use”. Fair use permits the use of copyrighted material without permission for commenting, critiques, journalism, education, scholarship, and research.

Note that scraping or posting images you don’t own on social media is not fair use. If someone is posting your stuff, say, like on Facebook, notify the poster or Facebook. Most social media platforms don’t care to be in the middle of copyright infringement claims and they’ll pull the images. Or at least they used to.

This will explain a lot about photographic copyright in plain English:
https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.csusa.org/resource/resmgr/Chapter_PA/phil_2015_08_06_mats.pdf

.

My apologies to the original poster of this thread, because this is going down a spur track.
I meant for the first post to be somewhat ridiculous and over the top. Just releasing some steam.
As for the fat ass in his/her mom's basement, I really don't care what he/she views on the screen, or if they play video games, or play with toy choochoos.
I go back to a point I was trying to make earlier. I understand that institutions must charge for copying and for rights to use material. If I need the material, I will purchase it if it is affordable.. That institution and probably the staff person will be given full credit in any publication.
However, if institutions are going to use proprietary material as a revenue source, why on earth would they give it away for free on the internet? That makes no sense. That material will be quickly spread around the web and any credit for the holding institution will soon be lost. Some institutions sensibly place thumbnail or marked images on line to display what they have. Others will place larger images on line for free that they have asked researchers to pay for!
When I pay for the rights to use an image, or other material, I believe there should be an expectation that the next user will have to pay also. I don't think this is selfishness. It is called protecting one's own ass and investment.
If your institution is dedicated to providing free images on line, then bless you. Keep up the good work.

I have a web site with a lot of photos -- some of which are mine or a family member's, others of which have been sent to me by others, and some of which I have purchased on eBay. Occasionally I find "my" photos posted online by someone else (and can usually identify them by image size, etc.). I have experienced several scenarios:
(1) When I find such photos, I attempt to contact the person and ask them to at least give credit. I don't sell photos, so I don't ask for compensation.
(2) However, some authors and web site owners have asked me for permission in advance to use "my" photos. I always grant permission provided credit is given (and sometimes they have paid me, sometimes not --that's not a big deal).
(3) If I (or a family member) was not the original photographer, I explain to the requester that I don't "own" the photo; they need to get permission from the original photographer, if that is possible.
(4) With any photo not taken by me (or a family member) that I use on my site, I always give credit to the original photographer, if known, and/or to the source (the person who sent me the photo, or the collection it was from). If purchased via eBay, I always note that.
To me, the main issue is giving proper credit or attribution whenever a photo is posted. Sometimes, with the photos from the "trading era" mentioned by the person who started this thread, the photo has no information about the photographer or collection. If that's the case, I at least indicate that, and explain where I got the photo (e.g., from someone who sent it to me, or via eBay). Sometimes I find the same photo posted on another site (usually the Railfan.net ABPR Archive), in which case I mention that and the person who posted the photo there, and provide a link. Integrity requires that we give as much information about the source of the photo as possible.

Steven,

most of these pictures you mention may fall in this category:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_works_in_the_United_States
- a growing problem which has not been solved in jurisdiction and does prevent many objects from being used in publications.

However you, sitting in a university, may have the privilege using these pictures under "fair use" while normal people can't.

Mike

There's so much disinformation in this thread, a pal of mine who is a international copyright attorney questioned what he'd done wrong to me that would make me "force this insanity" upon him when I asked him to read it. He called and said, "I wouldn't even know where to start..."
Talk to an attorney if you really want to be sure, or at the least, a real publisher (not some knucklehead who has self-published something) who has experience dealing with things like this.
People want to assume stuff is "free use" as much as they want to assume your tracks are 'abandoned' and okay to walk and ride on without your permission.

Being one of the "dummies" and "knuckleheads" who is into self-publishing, and who does not have a pal who is an international copyright attorney, or cannot afford an international copyright attorney, perhaps you could ask your pal to come on here and give us all a few pointers, pro bono. He could do a little synopsis of some of the key elements we need to know for protecting ourselves in the various areas being discussed in this thread.

I bet your copyright on your words will have expired until that happens! ;-)

It is usually those knuckleheads who know their themes best, not these professors and state museum directors who write books (or have them written) in office in their full-paid time.

I have helped quite a few authors with pictures from my archive and the copyright issue has always been solved easy all these times. This is more than some state archives do and that is why I don't like the "fair use"-approach too much. Fair use often means you can't use certain pictures in your book unless you are a state entity. Their book also have a price tag (so it is still somehow for-profit) but these guys can claim having "educational" aims and so are on the safe side.

Best you can do is comprehend the rules fully for yourself. The attorney won't help you afterwards, should he accidentally have given you the wrong advice. Copyright law is not that hard to understand, but surely one might not always like the consequences!

Mike