Michael Dorosh Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai: Copyright is hideously complicated. You're right that basically, under the Berne Convention, anything we publish, be it electronic or otherwise is covered by copyright. These images though, might well be in the public domain as the copyright holder (the Third Reich) has disappeared and it'd be very complex trying to sort out who owned it. Interestingly, its always been explained to me that if you alter a work/image and then publish it, even if you don't own the copyright to the original image, you then own the copyright to the altered image. So, if someone then republishes your altered version of the image, you can then sue them for publishing the altered image without your permission, even if, at the same time you're being sued for having published the original image! Ah, isn't litigation a wonderful thing? <hr></blockquote> That's what I'm banking on. The question is raised - where is the line drawn? If you run a photo through a slight colour filter - does that satisfy as being sufficiently "original" for you to bypass copyright? It's a very interesting question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWB Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 Commisar: It is a German site, even if it is in cyrillic. Add it to your favorites and see what the name resolves to. Such statements are a legal neccessity in Germany, see www.derkessel.de for an example. WWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurlyBen Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: The question is raised - where is the line drawn? If you run a photo through a slight colour filter - does that satisfy as being sufficiently "original" for you to bypass copyright? It's a very interesting question.<hr></blockquote> Well, producing a derivative work will bypass copyright only if it falls under "fair use". What constitutes fair use is deliberately vague, but has to do with how much of the original is used, what it is used for, what the original was used for, and whether the copy will have an effect on the value of the original. I think the point being made is that the new (color filter applied or whatever) work is copyrighted as well as the original, and whoever modified it holds the copyright to at least the modifications (Some vague thought at the back of my head is saying the modifications need to be "substantial" (another legal rubber word), but please do not trust me on that. ) As far as who (if anyone) owns the copyright on the pictures available on the website under discussion, I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar: I don't see why someone decided to say this was a Nazi site. Disclaimer taken from site home page (click the house icon to get to home page). "Предупреждение! Данный сайт посвящен истории Второй Мировой Войны и не пропагандирует идеи нацизма." Which translates to... "Warning! This site is dedicated to the history of the Second World War and does not preach the ideas of fascism."<hr></blockquote> Wow! You got all that from a row of question marks? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by wwb_99: It is a German site, even if it is in cyrillic.<hr></blockquote> I'm interested in how you figure this, since the site has .ru as its national suffix. Do you mean it was created by a German (or more) and just run from a Russian server of convenience? :confused: Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: Okay, sorry but no time to chat. GO HERE!!! now for the most amazing set of online COLOR photos of the wermacht in Russia that I have ever seen. Oh, man, I'm goin' back in...<hr></blockquote> Where's my turn you little pillock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael emrys: Wow! You got all that from a row of question marks?<hr></blockquote> Heh... you don't have support for cyrillic text installed in your system, that's why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 Strange, haven't managed a double post in ages. [ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: Seanachai ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MyNameW: picture says that "bolshevik" had thrown grenade at that guys tank. Why bolshevik??? <hr></blockquote> Perhaps because the caption is a direct transcription from the period edition of Signal magazine it was lifted from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> No need to feel guilty - I just think the webmaster should have at least acknowledged where he got the pictures from. There are some awesome American pictures as part of the same collection that others might like to see. <hr></blockquote> Mike D, do you have a link for the original US site? Or were the pics from a book? Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 SurlyBen wrote: Photographs, even ones that are scanned or digital, count. True. For works created after 1978, copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. For works created before 1978 (such as those pictures) things can be a bit more complicated, and stuff might or might not still have copyright attached to it However, photographs are a special case, at least in several legislation. Berne Convention states that (Article 7, paragraph 4 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr> It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to determine the term of protection of photographic works and that of works of applied art in so far as they are protected as artistic works; however, this term shall last at least until the end of a period of twenty-five years from the making of such a work. <hr></blockquote> In many countries (quick Googling results a list of Finland, Australia, and Canada) the limit is set to 50 years since making of the picture, so basically all WWII photos are public domain in these countries. - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurlyBen Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tss: However, photographs are a special case, at least in several legislation. Berne Convention states that (Article 7, paragraph 4 In many countries (quick Googling results a list of Finland, Australia, and Canada) the limit is set to 50 years since making of the picture, so basically all WWII photos are public domain in these countries. - Tommi<hr></blockquote> Hmm. Learn something new every day. I wonder how they tell the difference between a photograph and, say, an illustration? Not always as easy as you might think, especially these days. I know people who's job is to draw on photos to make them look more realistic... And there are art photographers who's work looks quite painterly (because they paint on it ) Surlyben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Oberst Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Seanachai: Strange, haven't managed a double post in ages. [ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: Seanachai ]<hr></blockquote> Jeez. Seanachai you twit. Most of us try to avoid double posts, and here you are posting about how you finally managed one. Is this some strange quest of yours? Trying to get your sauropodial limbic system to work fast enough to double post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 SurlyBen wrote: I wonder how they tell the difference between a photograph and, say, an illustration? Beats me, but then again, I'm not a lawyer. - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Seanachai: Strange, haven't managed a double post in ages.<hr></blockquote> You must feel greatly relieved then. But seriously, folks, the board has been doing strange things since the last upgrade. One of my posts got doubled the other day when I was dead certain that I had done nothing to cause it, and I notice a sudden flurry of double posts from other contributors as well. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tss: In many countries (quick Googling results a list of Finland, Australia, and Canada) the limit is set to 50 years since making of the picture, so basically all WWII photos are public domain in these countries.<hr></blockquote> I think there is another issue that applies in this case as well. At the end of the war, huge quantities of German material including photographs were confiscated by the victorious allies and placed in their respective countries' archives. IIRC, everything not classified was placed in the public domain. It is a conventional courtesy though when reprinting material from those archives to credit them. Or something like that. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Panzer Leader: COLOR photos<hr></blockquote> They look COLORIZED but not actually color photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyNameW Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar: I don't see why someone decided to say this was a Nazi site. Disclaimer taken from site home page (click the house icon to get to home page). "Предупреждение! Данный сайт посвящен истории Второй Мировой Войны и не пропагандирует идеи нацизма." Which translates to... "Warning! This site is dedicated to the history of the Second World War and does not preach the ideas of fascism."<hr></blockquote> I am ballerina!!! Anyone believes this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MyNameW: I am ballerina!!! Anyone believes this?<hr></blockquote> lol... Homer Simpson: You go, girl! Ralph Wiggum: I'm a boy. Homer Simpson: *patting RTalph on the head* You can by anything you wanna be... Until you give me solid proof that this webiste is engineered by people who practice the ideals of fascism, I won't believe you. BTW - Calling someone from the USSR a bolshevik doesn't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>By Michael "Little e" emrys:But seriously, folks, the board has been doing strange things since the last upgrade. <hr></blockquote> Yeah, my posts used to be twice as interesting before the upgrade. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: Yeah, my posts used to be twice as interesting before the upgrade.<hr></blockquote> It's all an insidious plot. They're probably polluting our precious bodily fluids as well. I can almost feel my IQ declining by the second. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 BTW, can anyone identify this plane? I've been asking around but so far no one had been able to ID it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CMplayer: They look COLORIZED but not actually color photos.<hr></blockquote> I think most of them actually are. The very deep saturation of reds (especially in the flames) is the trademark of Technicolor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Hofbauer Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael emrys: BTW, can anyone identify this plane? I've been asking around but so far no one had been able to ID it. Michael<hr></blockquote> oh, thatone's easy. going by the looks it's obviously a Weihe, official designation Focke-Wulf Fw58 IIRC. roughly in the same class as for example the Anson, it was a liasion, training and ambulance (medevac) aircraft also used as a testbed for equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 Thanks, Hofbauer. I'll politely ignore that "easy" crack! Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts