User talk:HasHasBoomBoom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Hector Berlioz

I see, which images are you talking about in particular? To get the name of an image, click the image, and then copy the name in bold at the top of the page that loads (should be Image:Something). Prodego ^talk 23:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, if those books were published in 1888, then they would have fallen into the Public domain (in the US) 95 years after publication, in 1983. It would have done the same in France 70 years after death of the author, which is true unless the photographer lived 70 more years after taking the photo, which is not likely. Therefore, the image is in the public domain, and free for anyone to use. The book is still able to be owned, but the image is not. Prodego ^talk 17:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, the books are very valuable. I would characterize it in the way that the Louvre has the Mona Lisa, but anyone can have a replica of the Mona Lisa, and the Louvre can't prevent that simply because they paid for the original painting. Prodego ^talk 18:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The last photo you talked about, it was taken in 1868. Under US law, the image is in the public domain, also under French law. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Any faithful reproduction of something in the public domain is in the public domain. See Public domain. I am not a lawyer though, and if you want a better explanation, BD2412 is quite qualified to explain, far more so than I am. Prodego ^talk 22:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Even if you went by UK law, the copyright of the image would have expired in the 1960's, if you want by the 70 years PMA rule. So, regardless of how you slice it, it is in the public domain and we will still host the images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it looks like these images are in the public domain. The copyright applies to the original work, not the digital reproduction of their image. If it applied to the digital reproduction, as has been asserted, no images on the internet would be public domain unless expressly released as so, as digital pictures are a relatively new thing for society. If that were true, there would have been a free-for-all to be the first person to get a digital image of famous paintings, pictures, etc. that would have otherwise been in the public domain. Basically you are saying that the first person to create a digital reproduction of the Mona Lisa is the only person who can use a picture of the Mona Lisa on the internet, which simply isn't true. VegaDark (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I see what you are talking about, and I will make sure the link to your site stays. Prodego ^talk 01:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)