Hello--
        It sounds to me that the issues revolve around the fact that the
artist passed off as her work something she actually copied, without,
apparently, any sort of acknowledgment of the source.  I don't think that
you can prevent an object in the public domain from being copied by anyone,
unless what they've done is publish a photograph you paid to have made.
Artists do look at, and use everything, but to publish a copy of something
that is essentially indistinguishable from the original is not exactly
common practice.
        This issue always reminds me of two people: Borges and Marty
Feldman  ("No, 'David Copperfield' with one 'p'.")
        Adrienne DeAngelis
        [log in to unmask]



    Greetings everyone:   I know this has been rehashed several times, but
I'd like to throw it out again because we have had a very specific
situation  arise.  Our institution owns and will regularly exhibit (since
our new  facility is completed) a magnificant collection of fraktur (PA
German  illuminated manuscripts).  With the great interest in early
American  decorative arts and folk art right now, many artists are looking
at our images  (and those that belong to other institutions, I'm sure) and
reproducing  them.  Recently an artist's repro of one of our pieces was
published in a  national magazine as her work.   This artist states that
she and fellow artists (as  she says, everyone does it) believe these works
to be in the public domain and  are free game for any one to copy.  We of
course feel that we must control  these very valuable and important
images.  I have a  fair acquaintance  with copyright law for photos and
recent works of art, and I believe because we  own these images we have the
right to say what may be done with them.  We  have had small museums who
are self-publishing books for very limited  distribution go through the
formal application process to use photographic  images from our collection
-- why is this different?  The artist claims the  work is not precisely the
same.  In print, however, it looks exactly like  our piece, so do her minor
alterations make it okay to reproduce without  even so much as a phone call
to us?  The kicker is that she says she  doesn't make much money off of the
repros, but that's always the same old story.  I'd very interested in what
anybody thinks -- artists who are lurking please let  me know your
thoughts, or how you have handled this situation.   Candace Perry
Schwenkfelder Library & Heritage  Center

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).