[log in to unmask] wrote:
 
> But the point I wanted to raise, had to do with intellectual property
> rights and copyright.  If the Enola Gay didactics were to have been scanned
> and put up on the net for all to see, would this have been a violation of
> copyright? Intellectual property rights?  I think it is a wide open
> question.  Those labels were the fruit of someones intellectual efforts.
> Do those labels belong to the individual(s) even if not published?  Or to
> the SI (and by extension the amurican taxpayer)?  Anyone got any thoughts?
 
Government-owned material is not copyrightable as far as I know. If the
label-writer (labelist?) was under the employ of the Smithsonian then
the labels belong to the government and, in turn, to all of us. If they
were taken from an outside source then the question of ownership
comes up. The law is fairly specific on this point.
 
Robbin Murphy
[log in to unmask]