On Jun 19, 1996 16:05:35, 'Richard Rinehart
<[log in to unmask]>' wrote:


>I agree with the sentiment expressed on this list so far; that is museums
>should treat permissions and fees for reproduction of museum-held images
in
>the same spirit as most already treat print (or for that matter TV
>documentaries) reproduction agreements.
[...]

>I too would love to hear of any activities (such as the upcoming issue of
>Visual Resources) on this topic. Thanks!

One interesting article that will appear in VR argues that from a
consideration of copyright, museums are in a very precarious position.
Because of the Berne Convention, aspects of which are now integrated into
U.S. law, this article argues that museums do not automatically own the
copyright of objects made by contemporary artists; this now remains with
the artist or the artist's estate unless assigned to the object's owner.
Furthermore, as soon as this copyright runs out the object enters the
public domain and is available for anyone to use in any way imaginable.
The argument is complex and suggests that standard museum photographs of
public domain objects, contrary to conventional belief, may not be
copyrightable.  Soon the table of contents for the VR copyright issue will
be posted in this forum.  Stay tuned.
--

Robert A. Baron
Guest Editor, Visual Resources: on copyright
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont N.Y. 10538
[log in to unmask]