N
Nico Schuyt
Is it allowed to use pictures of ancient artists (like Michelangelo) on a
website?
Regards, Nico
website?
Regards, Nico
S
Sid Ismail
: Is it allowed to use pictures of ancient artists (like Michelangelo) on a
: website?
Where did you find the pictures? Was there a copyright?
Sid
: website?
Where did you find the pictures? Was there a copyright?
Sid
N
Nico Schuyt
Sid said:
If the owner of the site doesn't state the copyright explicitly, it means I
can use the picture?
Nico
N
nice.guy.nige
IANAL, but as far as I understand it copyright exists until 75 years after
the death of the artist.
I repeat. IANAL. There may be issues involved with the pictures you have.
You may better off asking this in a more legal-oriented group.
Cheers,
Nige
--
Nigel Moss.
Email address is not valid. (e-mail address removed). Take the dog out!
http://www.nigenet.org.uk | Boycott E$$O!! http://www.stopesso.com
"How strange the change from major to minor..."
N
Nico Schuyt
Nico said:
OK, thanks all for replying.
I think it's solved with the 'little risk' mentioned by François
Regards, Nico
J
John W.
Nico Schuyt said:
You have an original?
If not you use a copy made by someone?
Doei.
John OO
--
<http://webcel.nl/>
<http://www.webcel.nl/bayshop/shop/bayshop.html>
"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once"
- John Archibald Wheeler -
A
Andy Dingley
Content is irrelevant. Who _created_ the picture ?
Stealing web images is more easily detected now than it used to be.
There's a good chance of getting caught doing it.
R
Richard
Nico Schuyt wrote:>>
It's public domain and there is no copyright.
Regardless of the fact that a book publisher may claim they havc a
copyright, it is not on that painting, or any artwork from before 1900 or
so.
The only thing they can copyright is their own original work.
It's public domain and there is no copyright.
Regardless of the fact that a book publisher may claim they havc a
copyright, it is not on that painting, or any artwork from before 1900 or
so.
The only thing they can copyright is their own original work.
R
Richard
Nico Schuyt wrote:>>
Not necessarily. If it's not in the public domain and they actually do have
a copyright on the artwork, then you could be walking on thin ice. The
copyright office will know if the artwork is public domain or not. Most well
known artist's works are public domain.
They just can't say they have a copyright and hope you don't steal the
image.
Many web site owners are under the wrong impression that what ever they put
on their site is copyright protected. It is not.
Not necessarily. If it's not in the public domain and they actually do have
a copyright on the artwork, then you could be walking on thin ice. The
copyright office will know if the artwork is public domain or not. Most well
known artist's works are public domain.
They just can't say they have a copyright and hope you don't steal the
image.
Many web site owners are under the wrong impression that what ever they put
on their site is copyright protected. It is not.
T
Toby A Inkster
Nico said:
Do you mean pictures *of* ancient artists, or pictures *by* ancient
artists?
T
Toby A Inkster
Hywel said:
That was rather my point - 'of' is ambiguous in this case.
I guess I could have made myself clearer:
Do you mean pictures *portraying* ancient artists, or pictures *by*
ancient artists?
T
Talc Ta Matt
Let's put it this way...
If a photographer gets permission to take the Mona Lisa out in a scenic field
somewhere to include it in the photograph, then it's pretty clear who owns the
photo.
Now if that same photographer goes into an art gallery and does a closeup shot,
there is zero chance of anyone knowing where the original photo came from due
to how many of these are out there.
It would be like doing a page on the history of America, and including a
standard photo of the White House that you didn't take yourself. Nothing is
going to happen to you.
If a photographer gets permission to take the Mona Lisa out in a scenic field
somewhere to include it in the photograph, then it's pretty clear who owns the
photo.
Now if that same photographer goes into an art gallery and does a closeup shot,
there is zero chance of anyone knowing where the original photo came from due
to how many of these are out there.
It would be like doing a page on the history of America, and including a
standard photo of the White House that you didn't take yourself. Nothing is
going to happen to you.
R
Roseb441702
If the owner of the site doesn't state the copyright explicitly, it means I
No, it doesn't mean that you can use the picture. Even if an image doesn't
have a copyright symbol it is still owned by the person that created it (or
owned by the person that owns the copyright)
Sorry
Rose
***************************************
"Give A ShoutOut To The World!"
Put Your Voice Message Online at:
The ShoutOut Page
http://members.aol.com/Roseb441702/shoutout.htm
No, it doesn't mean that you can use the picture. Even if an image doesn't
have a copyright symbol it is still owned by the person that created it (or
owned by the person that owns the copyright)
Sorry
Rose
***************************************
"Give A ShoutOut To The World!"
Put Your Voice Message Online at:
The ShoutOut Page
http://members.aol.com/Roseb441702/shoutout.htm