This message is from a thread on "copyright and museum-owned material"
which has been developing on the cni-copyright list. [To subscribe send a
message to [log in to unmask] with the contents: subscribe cni-copyright]
CNI is the Coalition for Networked Information.
 
J. Trant
Consultant
Arts Information Management
48 Wolverleigh Blvd,                Phone: (416) 462 9404
Toronto, ON M4J 1R7                 Fax:   (416) 462 0960
Canada                              Email: [log in to unmask]
 
 
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 18:35:49 -0500
From: Richard Prelinger <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Rights to reproduce museum-owned material
 
As owner of a stock film footage library, I encounter this
question on a regular basis and must agree with Henry Manaster's
formulation. A considerable amount (70%) of our collection lies
in public domain and is therefore not subject to "licensing" in
any legal sense. Rather, we charge what might be termed a
"usage" or "access" fee, which, though ultimately arbitary, is
tied to the degree of exposure projected for the intended
production.
 
Though individuals and companies in positions similar to ours
(and I will include most museums holding pre-1918 works under
this heading) invariably overstate the nature and extent of
the rights they hold in and to their physical materials, anyone
possessing "clean title" (i.e., legitimate chain of ownership)
to similar or identical materials may duplicate, sell, distribute,
"license", etc. these materials.
 
The only exception, which we attempt to leverage by controlling
the dissemination of our images with care, is when a contract
expressly governs the use of our images. For instance, anyone
acquiring footage from us agrees to use it only in the production
for which footage is requested. All master-quality materials must
be returned after the production is completed.
 
The situation is more ambiguous in cases where public domain
material is distributed to the public in "value-added" form. For
instance, we publish (with Voyager Presss) several videodiscs
containing film clips from our collection. We have tried to
collect for unauthorized usage of clips from the discs but have
had little luck, even though our competitors have actually sold
footage to their own customers off our discs. Since the only
appropriation that occurred in this case was contiguous segments
of PD films and none of our own edits, which could possibly
constitute protectable authorship, were taken, we had little
legal ground to recover damages.
 
In any case, my considered opinion is that museums are simply
controlling access by means of rules, regulations and equipment
restrictions.  These controls are bound to become stricter as
more museums delegate "licensing" activities to representatives
such as Microsoft/Continuum.
 
Rick Prelinger
Prelinger Archives, New York
[log in to unmask]