It would seem logical and appropriate that a museum shouldn't have to
request permission in such cases, but the law seems to make no provision
for such situations.  Listing such stolen work, especially on public
databases, does seem like a publication of sorts.  The real question is one
of speed.  The faster information about a work can be disseminated, the
more likely it may be quickly recovered.  If a museum had to obtain
permission from the copyright holder first, then this speed advantage may
be lost.  Because many modern works were acquired by museums without rights
of copyright, my hypothetical question may in some cases be a real issue.
At the same time, one cannot be assured that once requested, permission to
post an image of a work on a stolen-works database will automatically be
granted.

My general point is that in some instances the law does not adequately
define situations in which the public interest overrides the author's right
to copyright.  For teaching and scholarship there, at least, is an attempt
to define "fair use," though that right is so vague and murky that many
users simply refuse to claim it when it is theirs.

At 09:56 AM 8/29/97 -0400, Arlyn Danielson wrote:
>Dear Mr. Baron:   this is a very interesting situation you hypothetically
>bring up.   I am not a copyright expert, but in the case of a stolen piece
>of art (or whatever), wouldn't the desire and interest in recovering the
>item (from both the museum's and artist's perspective)  override possible
>database copyright difficulties? In trying to recover stolen goods by
>posting the information on a specialized database, there is no motive for
>financial gain, only the desire to recover the item.   These are my
>thoughts only.  I would like to find out what the law actually says.  Does
>anyone know?
>
>Arlyn Danielson
>
>
>----------
>From:   Robert A. Baron[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent:   Thursday, August 28, 1997 10:22 PM
>To:     [log in to unmask]
>Subject:        Stolen art and copyright
>
>At 03:54 AM 8/25/97 GMT, you wrote:
>>Some of you may have read previous messages from me on this subject --
>>
>>I am writing a law review article on searching for stolen art/antiquities
>>on the internet. Previous responses to my postings have offered tremendous
>>on-line resources, but I wonder if anyone can help with a more historical
>>perspective -- how did you handle searching for your stolen
>>art/antiquities prior to the internet. Anecdotes are welcome, and
>>attribution given!
>>
>>Thanks in advance for the help!
>>
>>Laura McFarland-Taylor
>>The John Marshall Law School
>>[log in to unmask]
>>
>Here is a hypothetical question regarding stolen art and copyright:
>
>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?
>
>I see nothing in the "fair use" provisions of the U.S. copyright law which
>might apply here.  Normally copies of such works are allowed for "internal"
>object management and insurance; but public databases of stolen art,
>especially if placed on the Web, may be thrown into the same basket of
>infringing usages as public dababases of artworks that are not stolen.
>
>Robert Baron
>[log in to unmask]
>