>Is there any exact specification for copyright presentation?
Yes, for legal purposes, I think there is both a proper form for the
copyright notice, if it is used, for the contents of the notice, if it is
used, and for the date that should be used. The date, I believe, is the
date of registration of the copyright, if it is registered, or the date of
publication, interpreted very broadly to include any public display of the
image.
However, as to the dates used on a copyright notice, the situation does get
a little murky when there are transfers of the copyright from one party to
another which might result in the use of the date of the transfer; but I am
unclear on this.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Larry Berman
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 11:07 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: Jay Maisel Interview with Pictures and
Link...
The copyright that Jay Maisel requested was in his cover letter.
We've all seen copyright stated in various ways. Sometimes with two years,
the year of origin and year of publication. Sometimes just the year of
publication. If you've seen older single year copyright, it has probably
been that the images was published in that year. On the web it might mean
that the site hasn't been updated.
Is there any exact specification for copyright presentation?
Larry
>Berry wrote: "If Jay Maisel has not shot film, except for one roll, during
>the past year,
>how is it that all of the images are copyright 2001, yet most are from
film?
>
>I guess the copyright does not correspond to the date the image was shot?"
>
>I noticed that too. The copyright definitely does not correspond. Some of
>those images are 15+ years old.
>
>Cathy
<:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:>
Larry Berman
Web Sites for Artists:
Compare Image Compression from the top
Graphics Programs:
Explore the Art Show Jury process from a web site:
<:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:><:>
