Re: filmscanners: Importance of Copyright on Images

["Anthony Atkielski" <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr>]

Laurie writes:

> However, it just might be the case that the
> images on a given site are not privately
> owned images but images in the public
> domain ...

Virtually nothing is in the public domain, and I agree with those who object to
the phrasing of the search engine's warning.  Saying that an image "might be
copyrighted" implies that copyright protection is the exception to the rule,
when in fact, essentially everything is copyrighted, unless it is explicitly
released to the public domain by the copyright holder, or unless it has entered
the public domain through expiration of copyright.  And in some jurisdictions a
copyright holder _cannot_ release his work entirely to the public domain; it can
only enter the public domain when the copyright expires.

So the search engine should really be saying "this is copyrighted material" (the
exceptions being practically nil).

> ... or that even if copyrighted they are
> royalty free images ( sort of like freeware)
> that anyone can use in any manner or for any
> purpose they see fit ...

Images like that are almost as rare as public-domain images.  And in any case,
they are still copyrighted, so the misleading notice mentioned above remains
inappropriate.

> I would suggest that this is why the *might*
> be copyrighted qualification is used rather
> than the *is* copyrighted caution.

If the engine says it is copyrighted and it is public domain, no big deal, since
there is no owner whose rights are being infringed.  But if the engine implies
that it isn't copyrighted when it is, the owner of the copyright may have a
legitimate gripe about the deliberately misleading nature of the message.

> Moreover, some images even when or if copyrighted
> do not require permissions or even photo credits for
> certain types of uses ...

But they are still copyrighted, aren't they?  So implying that they are not is
still inappropriate.  And assuming fair use is also highly inappropriate, since
the cases of fair use of an image represent only a very tiny fraction of all
possible uses of an image, despite the unjustifiably optimistic viewpoints of
some image users.

> Thus, noting that they might be copyrighted
> rather than that they are may be all the caution
> that is required or appropriate.

Copyright is the default when a work is created.  Therefore all works should be
treated as protected by copyright until and unless the absence of such
protection can be established.