Discussion:
What is the name of your state? Rhode Island
Hello.
My mother and I wished to make picture thank you cards to send to family and friends thanking them for coming to our aunt and uncle's SEVENTIETH wedding anniversary. Our idea was to put their wedding portrait (faces only) on one side and a recent photo taken at their party on the other. However the store we took the photos into said that they would not allow us to use the old photo (which was taken at a professional photographer's studio over 70 years ago which is no longer in business in RI) because it is in violation of the copyright laws.
Certainly the picture was not going to be used for any personal gains whatsover but simply as a commemorative of their 70 year accomplishment. Could this situation have fallen under fair use? Are there exceptions to the copyright law?
Thank you.
Fran
Answer:
What is the name of your state? Rhode Island
Hello.
My mother and I wished to make picture thank you cards to send to family and friends thanking them for coming to our aunt and uncle's SEVENTIETH wedding anniversary. Our idea was to put their wedding portrait (faces only) on one side and a recent photo taken at their party on the other. However the store we took the photos into said that they would not allow us to use the old photo (which was taken at a professional photographer's studio over 70 years ago which is no longer in business in RI) because it is in violation of the copyright laws.
Certainly the picture was not going to be used for any personal gains whatsover but simply as a commemorative of their 70 year accomplishment. Could this situation have fallen under fair use? Are there exceptions to the copyright law?
Thank you.
Fran
PhotoShop
Answer:
What is the name of your state? Rhode Island
Hello.
My mother and I wished to make picture thank you cards to send to family and friends thanking them for coming to our aunt and uncle's SEVENTIETH wedding anniversary. Our idea was to put their wedding portrait (faces only) on one side and a recent photo taken at their party on the other. However the store we took the photos into said that they would not allow us to use the old photo (which was taken at a professional photographer's studio over 70 years ago which is no longer in business in RI) because it is in violation of the copyright laws.
Certainly the picture was not going to be used for any personal gains whatsover but simply as a commemorative of their 70 year accomplishment. Could this situation have fallen under fair use? Are there exceptions to the copyright law?
Thank you.
Fran This isn't really a "fair use" issue, and besides, the printing place isn't going to allow you to rely on "fair use" anyway. Does the picture have a copyright notice on it (the "c" in a circle, with a date)? If not, you are free to use the picture, it's in the public domain. Now, that doesn't mean that any printing place will print it, so you may need to shop around until you can find a place that will do it.
Answer:
This isn't really a "fair use" issue, and besides, the printing place isn't going to allow you to rely on "fair use" anyway. Does the picture have a copyright notice on it (the "c" in a circle, with a date)? If not, you are free to use the picture, it's in the public domain. Now, that doesn't mean that any printing place will print it, so you may need to shop around until you can find a place that will do it. Hijack:
I read an article by a patent lawyer who said the single most device folks want to patent is a "talking dildo".
Is that your experience also?
Answer:
Hijack:
I read an article by a patent lawyer who said the single most device folks want to patent is a "talking dildo".
Is that your experience also? There have been some strange inventions come through the office here, but nothing that quite rises to that level...
Answer:
There have been some strange inventions come through the office here, but nothing that quite rises to that level... Good one....
Answer:
Divgradcurl:
Thank you for responding. The only identifying marking on the portrait is the name of the studio. PLUS, we went in with a COPY of the original picture because another company took a risk in making a copy of the orginial. And STILL the request was denied.
Thanks again.
Answer:
Divgradcurl:
Thank you for responding. The only identifying marking on the portrait is the name of the studio. PLUS, we went in with a COPY of the original picture because another company took a risk in making a copy of the orginial. And STILL the request was denied.
Thanks again.
With no notice, the picture is almost certainly in the public domain. However, that doesn't mean any particular store has to copy the picture, so you should just keep on trying!
Answer:
One hopefully final word on this matter. Is it possible that the store is being discriminatory against such things and mis-quoting the law? I was so annoyed with the ****iness of the employee that I almost want to follow through with something. But, as I speak with my senses now, I know it's ludicrous. But, really, the kid and manager gave the obligatory speech, "...it's a $10,000 fine..." . Technically they are deliberately keeping me from using a photo which is perfectly fine to use according to you (if all the info I've supplied is true and accurate, which it is).
Answer:
One hopefully final word on this matter. Is it possible that the store is being discriminatory against such things and mis-quoting the law? I was so annoyed with the ****iness of the employee that I almost want to follow through with something. But, as I speak with my senses now, I know it's ludicrous. But, really, the kid and manager gave the obligatory speech, "...it's a $10,000 fine..." . Technically they are deliberately keeping me from using a photo which is perfectly fine to use according to you (if all the info I've supplied is true and accurate, which it is). Look at it from their point of view -- if they copy a picture, and it turns out that the copy is infringing, THEY are on the hook, not you. They are not going to take your word for it that it is okay. Maybe if you were a lawyer they would, who knows. They are protecting themselves, maybe they are being overly conservative, but from their perspective, that's better than risking a copyright infringement lawsuit.
Forget about this place, go somewhere else and try and get it done. Or buy a scanner and color printer and do it at home.
Answer:
One hopefully final word on this matter. Is it possible that the store is being discriminatory against such things and mis-quoting the law? I was so annoyed with the ****iness of the employee that I almost want to follow through with something. But, as I speak with my senses now, I know it's ludicrous. But, really, the kid and manager gave the obligatory speech, "...it's a $10,000 fine..." . Technically they are deliberately keeping me from using a photo which is perfectly fine to use according to you (if all the info I've supplied is true and accurate, which it is). Let me say it again: No damages, no case.
(Of course they are being discriminatory...discrimination--except in a few clear cases--is NOT against the law!)
Answer:

Answer:
Hello Happy Husband--
(Let me say that it is a pleasure to hear that there is a HAPPY husband out there).
I read the link you responded with. However, the original photographer who took the portrait over 70 years ago is out of business, so technically how would I get their permission to use the photo anyway? So what does the law state when the company who took the original photo is out of business?
I really wanted to end this at my prior post. And, Mr. Senior Judge I'm glad that you realize that the store is discriminating against not just me, but EVERYONE whose case is similar to mine.
I really want to let this go.....
Answer:
Hello Happy Husband--
(Let me say that it is a pleasure to hear that there is a HAPPY husband out there).
I read the link you responded with. However, the original photographer who took the portrait over 70 years ago is out of business, so technically how would I get their permission to use the photo anyway? So what does the law state when the company who took the original photo is out of business?
I really wanted to end this at my prior post. And, Mr. Senior Judge I'm glad that you realize that the store is discriminating against not just me, but EVERYONE whose case is similar to mine.
I really want to let this go..... Perhaps you missed the word PHOTOSHOP in one of the earlier posts???
I mean, if you were to do the cards yourself, no one here or anywhere else would really know about it , now would they?? Of course, I am in NO WAY insinuating that might have been the intention of the original poster.
Answer:
So what does the law state when the company who took the original photo is out of business? Well, in your case, the copyright never existed in the first place, so you don't have to worry about it!
But, had the photo been printed with the proper notice such that the copyright was still in force today, whoever purchased the assets of the original company (or the company's creditors) would likely have been the next owner of the copyright -- and from there, who knows. This is one of the problems with copyright law the way it is currently put together -- there just isn't any easy (or even hard) way to determine who is the current owner of a copyright, and since copyrights can last for 90 years or more, people die, companies go out of business, etc., and there is oftentimes no simple way (and sometimes no way at all) to determine whether or not a particular piece is copyrighted or not, and who owns the copyright. Sometimes the only way to find out is to use a work, and see if you get sued.
And it's worse now, because nowadays you don't even need a copyright notice, copyrights arise automatically once a work is created, and all copyrights last for at least 70 years, and oftentimes far longer than that.
Just be glad that at least you have an old picture without a copyright notice, so you know for sure it's in the public domain!