In article <[log in to unmask]>, "Robert A. Baron"
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> A work of art, under copyright, is stolen from a museum which owns the
> object, but not the rights of reproduction.  Might the copyright holder
> successfully claim infringement if the object owner places reproductions of
> the stolen work on the various databases and lists maintained to help
> identify and find stolen works?

It's important to remember that copyright law is case law, meaning it's current
interpretation is based on what decisions have been made and which ones are
being brought up by the attorneys at this trial.  There can be no hard-and-fast
yes-or-no answer.

However, I should think this is most easily dealt with by the owner asking
permission of the copyright holder to post "ads".  It seems highly unlikely to
me that the holder would say no.  After all, the stolen work can't be seen by
anyone, and that's the route to "fame and fortune" (i.e., success) for an
artist.  There might be some details to work out, such as the resolution of the
pictures sent out, but I can't imagine the CR holder objecting to the owner's
attempts to retrieve its property (unless the CR holder is the one who stole
it, of course!).

Just my 2 cents,
Robin

Robin K Panza                   [log in to unmask]
Section of Birds, Carnegie MNH
Pittsburgh  PA  15213  USA