On Dec 12, 1995 15:59:28 in article <Copyright and images on the web>,
'Andrea Bandelli <[log in to unmask]>' wrote:

>I also wouldn't worry too much about the copyright. You can put on the web

>low resolution images that can be suitable for a web site, but not for
>other uses. For sure you cannot print them on paper, and as Ray Vincent
>said, in every art magazine you find so many images at a higher
resolution.
>I think that the role of the Web is to inform and communicate, and as a
>broadcasting company, you must have the right to show samples of what
>you're talking about without worrying about copyrights. What the user does

>with that is another question. But in the same way as TV companies and
>newsmagazines can reproduce fragments of everything without paying for
>copyright, in the same way you can do that on the Web. And trying to put a

>limit on this is like avoiding to be on TV or on newspapers because
>somebody can tape or scan an image... Have you ever heard of somebody who
>doesn't want to be displayed in a magazine because of this?

wrong, wrong, wrong. one must protect one's copyright or it can be lost to
public domain. if you were right [and excuse any misspellings, please],
selchow and richter would not be so gung ho about protecting the status of
scrabble's copyright. in writers' trade magazines, many companies take ads
asking authors to cresit copyrights. coke will follow up with any candy
store that has a non-authorized coke sign, especially if the store doesn't
sell coke [tm]. the worst cases of image theft are on those 'personal' web
pages that many internet providers give all their subscribers. check with
your lawyer before you act on this.

--
Brian A Padol, RECAP: Publications, Inc.
[log in to unmask] <=> [log in to unmask] <=> http://www.inch.com/~rpi/

http://www.users.nyc.pipeline.com/~rpi/

Book publishers, producers, and agents. If you have a book or book idea or
need advice or help with a book project or DTP, or just want to email or
chat, let me know.