At 07:57 AM 6/14/2002 -0600, you wrote: >Alan, > >Let's think about what you want to do. You found some pictures, and now you >want to "control" their use. > >You did NOT create these images. You simply found them. Why do you think YOU >should have any control of the images. > >That is not to say you do not currently own the physical photographs. They >do have antique value. But for you, that is their only value. And there is >value in very old images. But since you are not the creator, why do you feel >you should have any other control over their use other than their physical >possession? > >Copyright/patent laws are to protect the rights of those who intellectually >created something. In this case, you did not. There are also limits to the >creativity protection, as the government, wise or not, feels that there is >public good involved allowing history to pass without penalty to the >populace once the creator has had a chance to financially capitalize of >their creations. > >You, in this case, have no original creation. You do have pieces of history. >You do have antiques with some intrinsic value because of age. > >I am having difficulty understanding why you feel you should have any right >to "control over their use." This kind of material should be allowed to pass >gracefully into the public domain. What is wrong with allowing these >photographs to be placed on the Web, or anywhere, so we can all look, >appreciate and possibly learn a bit about history or even photography from >viewing them? > >But you have started a very interesting topic. I hope others put in their >thoughts. Intellectual property law is written, but not settled. I have no >idea where it will be in 5, 10 and 20 years. It is only through debate and >looking at the issue from all angles that intelligence can prevail in future >changes to the law. Thanks for bringing this up. > >peace, > >rand > Rand, I have to agree in spirit with what you have stated. As far as having intellectual property rights - as we all know a very slippery subject these days - wouldn't having the good sense to recognize the value of the work and collect it in the first place be protectable (semi-facetious remark)? Owners of collections charge fees for the use of the images they posses if they are not otherwise protected. I feel that I'm providing a service to anyone who uses a picture I own whether the picture exists in another collection or not - which is often the case. If I put a 72dpi JPG on my web page and offer its one time use for sale as-is or at a larger size I should have some legal recourse to protect it. AZ Maker of Lookaround panoramic camera. http://www.panoramacamera.us or keyword.com lookaround
