If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Q: Art stamps on the Internet ??
This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes
again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. Example 1. Pablo Picasso died in 1973. His art works as a whole are protected from being shown in public until 70 years after his death, i.e. they can only be shown on the Internet or other public exhibitions in 2043 (!), unless the exhibitor can provide a written permission from the estate (or the copyright owner) or pays a *very* substantial due to Copy-Dan for the permission (for a limited period of 1 month). Any art work -- whether on stamps or not -- may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the estate, or payment of dues to Copy-Dan for the permission. Example 2. Arnold Machin died in 1999. The case is the same as for Picasso, and stamps designed by Machin may not be shown on the Internet or elsewhere in the public before 2069. Esample 3: A living post war artist, who has had the luck of having one of his art works published on a stamp by a postal administration (of whichever nationality), can not have his/her art work on the stamp shown in public until 70 years after his death (whenever that may be). Given that he/she is still alive and may easily live for another 30 years, his work on stamps is not admissible to the public for the nest 100 years -- even when issued legally on a stamp !!! It is unimportant to Copy-Dan that stamps and philatelic material may be legally issued by a national post office for postal purposes. Copy-Dan does not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) the legal copyright owner with regard to showing art stamps and related philatelic material on the Internet or special museum exhibits, as long as the artist is still alive or hasn't been dead for at least 70 years. The rigid interpretation is that the artist must have passed away 70 years prior to the issues in question -- if not, either the exhibitor produces a written permission from the artist / his estate, or pays his dues as settled by Copy-Dan. I know of a recent case in Great Britain, where the National Gallery in London had planned an exhibit of the Art Nouveau artist Alfons Mucha in collaboration with the Czech National Gallery. The exhibit was stopped by Mucha's estate, claiming that Mucha died "only" in 1939, and that the exhibit could therefore not be shown legally before 2009. There are other similar cases in Europe, based on this rigid interpretation, which have nearly ruined the exhibitors who have worked in good faith. Copy-Dan has sent me a looong list of sister-organisations throughout the world, and notified me that they will chase anyone in any country (through their network) offending the interpretation of the current copyright legislation, which is applicable within the EU and all affiliated nations in Europe and the Mediterranean Area. How are things working in *your* country? -- Best regards Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) ------ Outgoing messages.checked with Norton AV |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"amesh" wrote in message k... This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. Example 1. Pablo Picasso died in 1973. His art works as a whole are protected from being shown in public until 70 years after his death, i.e. they can only be shown on the Internet or other public exhibitions in 2043 (!), unless the exhibitor can provide a written permission from the estate (or the copyright owner) or pays a *very* substantial due to Copy-Dan for the permission (for a limited period of 1 month). Any art work -- whether on stamps or not -- may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the estate, or payment of dues to Copy-Dan for the permission. Example 2. Arnold Machin died in 1999. The case is the same as for Picasso, and stamps designed by Machin may not be shown on the Internet or elsewhere in the public before 2069. Esample 3: A living post war artist, who has had the luck of having one of his art works published on a stamp by a postal administration (of whichever nationality), can not have his/her art work on the stamp shown in public until 70 years after his death (whenever that may be). Given that he/she is still alive and may easily live for another 30 years, his work on stamps is not admissible to the public for the nest 100 years -- even when issued legally on a stamp !!! It is unimportant to Copy-Dan that stamps and philatelic material may be legally issued by a national post office for postal purposes. Copy-Dan does not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) the legal copyright owner with regard to showing art stamps and related philatelic material on the Internet or special museum exhibits, as long as the artist is still alive or hasn't been dead for at least 70 years. The rigid interpretation is that the artist must have passed away 70 years prior to the issues in question -- if not, either the exhibitor produces a written permission from the artist / his estate, or pays his dues as settled by Copy-Dan. I know of a recent case in Great Britain, where the National Gallery in London had planned an exhibit of the Art Nouveau artist Alfons Mucha in collaboration with the Czech National Gallery. The exhibit was stopped by Mucha's estate, claiming that Mucha died "only" in 1939, and that the exhibit could therefore not be shown legally before 2009. There are other similar cases in Europe, based on this rigid interpretation, which have nearly ruined the exhibitors who have worked in good faith. Copy-Dan has sent me a looong list of sister-organisations throughout the world, and notified me that they will chase anyone in any country (through their network) offending the interpretation of the current copyright legislation, which is applicable within the EU and all affiliated nations in Europe and the Mediterranean Area. How are things working in *your* country? -- Best regards Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) ------ Outgoing messages.checked with Norton AV Mette I have to say that in my opinion far too much power is given to owners of intellectual property rights nowadays, including copyright owners. For example we have the pharmaceutical lobby, using the excuse of inadequate rewards for their investment to screw the third world as much as they can and force them to buy their products at prices that are ruinous either for the economies of these poor countries or for their citizens' well-being, and the powerful European software lobby demanding "software patents", allegedly to keep pace with the USA, but we all know the real reason. We now have copyright organisations demanding many different far-reaching changes in the law. The extension of copyright term in artistic works from life plus 50 years to life plus 70 years not so long ago is a case in point, entirely without justification in my opinion. Another new right being currently debated is for the author (painter, sculptor) to share in gains made whenever their works are re-sold, presumably at any time during the extended copyright period. For author, read their greedy descendants (I believe that the Picasso family have indeed been instrumental in pushing for this right). This business is getting as sick as the world of football transfers! We now have organisations purporting to represent copyright owners attempting to stretch these rights even further, and in the present case they are surely pre-judging the rights granted to postal authorities when stating that they do not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) as the legal copyright owner. Even if the artist grants rights to the relevant a licence only for use on material relating to postage stamps (or whatever items are defined in the licence document) then it is possible that those rights are "exhausted" once the work in question appears on the postal item. In that case, any unauthorised reproduction of that item might be an infringement of the rights held by the postal authority, but would no longer be actionable by the owner of the copyright in the work illustrated on the item. I have to say that I do not think the legal position is at all clear, and that test cases will need to be brought, and these would need to involve defendants with sufficient resources to force the legal action up to a sufficiently high level for any judgement to be influential. Of course, it is not just the artist who might claim an interest. What about the stamp designer, or the engraver who might have made no small contribution to the final appearance of the stamp? I think that in contacting you, Copy-Dan are trying to stretch their muscles with a bit of scare tactics. Are they at all specific about their reference to what they describe as "European copyright legislation"? I suspect they are putting their own interpretation on some of the vague terms in which EC Directives are normally drafted. Regards, Roger |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
amesh wrote: This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. Example 1. Pablo Picasso died in 1973. His art works as a whole are protected from being shown in public until 70 years after his death, i.e. they can only be shown on the Internet or other public exhibitions in 2043 (!), unless the exhibitor can provide a written permission from the estate (or the copyright owner) or pays a *very* substantial due to Copy-Dan for the permission (for a limited period of 1 month). Any art work -- whether on stamps or not -- may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the estate, or payment of dues to Copy-Dan for the permission. Example 2. Arnold Machin died in 1999. The case is the same as for Picasso, and stamps designed by Machin may not be shown on the Internet or elsewhere in the public before 2069. Esample 3: A living post war artist, who has had the luck of having one of his art works published on a stamp by a postal administration (of whichever nationality), can not have his/her art work on the stamp shown in public until 70 years after his death (whenever that may be). Given that he/she is still alive and may easily live for another 30 years, his work on stamps is not admissible to the public for the nest 100 years -- even when issued legally on a stamp !!! It is unimportant to Copy-Dan that stamps and philatelic material may be legally issued by a national post office for postal purposes. Copy-Dan does not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) the legal copyright owner with regard to showing art stamps and related philatelic material on the Internet or special museum exhibits, as long as the artist is still alive or hasn't been dead for at least 70 years. The rigid interpretation is that the artist must have passed away 70 years prior to the issues in question -- if not, either the exhibitor produces a written permission from the artist / his estate, or pays his dues as settled by Copy-Dan. I know of a recent case in Great Britain, where the National Gallery in London had planned an exhibit of the Art Nouveau artist Alfons Mucha in collaboration with the Czech National Gallery. The exhibit was stopped by Mucha's estate, claiming that Mucha died "only" in 1939, and that the exhibit could therefore not be shown legally before 2009. There are other similar cases in Europe, based on this rigid interpretation, which have nearly ruined the exhibitors who have worked in good faith. Copy-Dan has sent me a looong list of sister-organisations throughout the world, and notified me that they will chase anyone in any country (through their network) offending the interpretation of the current copyright legislation, which is applicable within the EU and all affiliated nations in Europe and the Mediterranean Area. How are things working in *your* country? -- Best regards Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) ------ Outgoing messages.checked with Norton AV There is a well known living painter that either trademarked or copyrighted 'painter of light'. It would seem that artists previous to that have been dubbed thus. I am going to trademark 'painter of canvas' and 'painter of light and heavy canvas'. As far as stopping people from showing postage stamps, that in my thinking are something in themselves separate from the art and artist they may honor, I agree with Roger, let 'em go to court. The Mucha estate could have given permission or it could easily have been requested by the museums. Unless that was some precedent it would seem they, the museums, would have known that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
1. I would hate to see Mette's beautiful web pages disappear as a result
of Copy-Dan's notice. 2. Would this 70 years + limitation apply also to printed/CD-ROM catalogs depicting these stamps? In the US there's a "fair use" doctrine that may or may not apply here. Still, this sounds like several disasters in the making! Bill Sharpe "amesh" wrote in message k... This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. Example 1. Pablo Picasso died in 1973. His art works as a whole are protected from being shown in public until 70 years after his death, i.e. they can only be shown on the Internet or other public exhibitions in 2043 (!), unless the exhibitor can provide a written permission from the estate (or the copyright owner) or pays a *very* substantial due to Copy-Dan for the permission (for a limited period of 1 month). Any art work -- whether on stamps or not -- may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the estate, or payment of dues to Copy-Dan for the permission. Example 2. Arnold Machin died in 1999. The case is the same as for Picasso, and stamps designed by Machin may not be shown on the Internet or elsewhere in the public before 2069. Esample 3: A living post war artist, who has had the luck of having one of his art works published on a stamp by a postal administration (of whichever nationality), can not have his/her art work on the stamp shown in public until 70 years after his death (whenever that may be). Given that he/she is still alive and may easily live for another 30 years, his work on stamps is not admissible to the public for the nest 100 years -- even when issued legally on a stamp !!! It is unimportant to Copy-Dan that stamps and philatelic material may be legally issued by a national post office for postal purposes. Copy-Dan does not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) the legal copyright owner with regard to showing art stamps and related philatelic material on the Internet or special museum exhibits, as long as the artist is still alive or hasn't been dead for at least 70 years. The rigid interpretation is that the artist must have passed away 70 years prior to the issues in question -- if not, either the exhibitor produces a written permission from the artist / his estate, or pays his dues as settled by Copy-Dan. I know of a recent case in Great Britain, where the National Gallery in London had planned an exhibit of the Art Nouveau artist Alfons Mucha in collaboration with the Czech National Gallery. The exhibit was stopped by Mucha's estate, claiming that Mucha died "only" in 1939, and that the exhibit could therefore not be shown legally before 2009. There are other similar cases in Europe, based on this rigid interpretation, which have nearly ruined the exhibitors who have worked in good faith. Copy-Dan has sent me a looong list of sister-organisations throughout the world, and notified me that they will chase anyone in any country (through their network) offending the interpretation of the current copyright legislation, which is applicable within the EU and all affiliated nations in Europe and the Mediterranean Area. How are things working in *your* country? -- Best regards Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) ------ Outgoing messages.checked with Norton AV |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Roger Smith" skrev i en meddelelse
... "amesh" wrote in message k... - snip - Roger, You and I are on exactly the same level of thinking, and I am more than tempted to bring this question before the court to have some of these questions clarified. But I also fear that as an individual I am bound to loose my case. Frankly, I cannot think of anyone who as an individual might win a case against a powerful and self-righteous bureaucracy ;-) Regards Mette |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"loepp" skrev i en meddelelse
... - snip - There is a well known living painter that either trademarked or copyrighted 'painter of light'. It would seem that artists previous to that have been dubbed thus. I am going to trademark 'painter of canvas' and 'painter of light and heavy canvas'. As far as stopping people from showing postage stamps, that in my thinking are something in themselves separate from the art and artist they may honor, I agree with Roger, let 'em go to court. The Mucha estate could have given permission or it could easily have been requested by the museums. Unless that was some precedent it would seem they, the museums, would have known that. The preparations for the Mucha-exhibit were begun in 1998, when the life + 50 years protection was still in force. The general extension enforced in 1999 to life + 70 years made more harm than good to the art world. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Sharpe" skrev i en meddelelse
... 1. I would hate to see Mette's beautiful web pages disappear as a result of Copy-Dan's notice. Thanks Bill :-) they won't disappear totally, only the 20th century artists and artistic movements have been requested removed (or "paid for"). E.g. Chagall, Picasso, Dali, Miro, Matisse etc., and such movements as Expressionism, Post-Expressionism, Fauvism, Surrealism, and all the "wild" movements from the 1960s. But, of course, I can always pay Copy-Dan about 1,000 dollars per month for their "protection"! 2. Would this 70 years + limitation apply also to printed/CD-ROM catalogs depicting these stamps? Probably, but I haven't investigated that. However, it is a fact that most art books concerning the 20th century artists and movements are now hard to find, because they have been retracted from the market. One that has survived, is about "Suprematism" and Kasimir Malevich, who died in 1935 (70 years ago), and therefore is freely available. In the US there's a "fair use" doctrine that may or may not apply here. The fair use doctrine does apply, but is interpretated differently by the authorities and the users ... Still, this sounds like several disasters in the making! Yes, this lobby has done more harm than good. Mette |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"amesh" wrote in message k... This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. Example 1. Pablo Picasso died in 1973. His art works as a whole are protected from being shown in public until 70 years after his death, i.e. they can only be shown on the Internet or other public exhibitions in 2043 (!), unless the exhibitor can provide a written permission from the estate (or the copyright owner) or pays a *very* substantial due to Copy-Dan for the permission (for a limited period of 1 month). Any art work -- whether on stamps or not -- may not be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the estate, or payment of dues to Copy-Dan for the permission. Example 2. Arnold Machin died in 1999. The case is the same as for Picasso, and stamps designed by Machin may not be shown on the Internet or elsewhere in the public before 2069. Esample 3: A living post war artist, who has had the luck of having one of his art works published on a stamp by a postal administration (of whichever nationality), can not have his/her art work on the stamp shown in public until 70 years after his death (whenever that may be). Given that he/she is still alive and may easily live for another 30 years, his work on stamps is not admissible to the public for the nest 100 years -- even when issued legally on a stamp !!! It is unimportant to Copy-Dan that stamps and philatelic material may be legally issued by a national post office for postal purposes. Copy-Dan does not consider the issuing postal administration (of whichever nationality) the legal copyright owner with regard to showing art stamps and related philatelic material on the Internet or special museum exhibits, as long as the artist is still alive or hasn't been dead for at least 70 years. The rigid interpretation is that the artist must have passed away 70 years prior to the issues in question -- if not, either the exhibitor produces a written permission from the artist / his estate, or pays his dues as settled by Copy-Dan. I know of a recent case in Great Britain, where the National Gallery in London had planned an exhibit of the Art Nouveau artist Alfons Mucha in collaboration with the Czech National Gallery. The exhibit was stopped by Mucha's estate, claiming that Mucha died "only" in 1939, and that the exhibit could therefore not be shown legally before 2009. There are other similar cases in Europe, based on this rigid interpretation, which have nearly ruined the exhibitors who have worked in good faith. Copy-Dan has sent me a looong list of sister-organisations throughout the world, and notified me that they will chase anyone in any country (through their network) offending the interpretation of the current copyright legislation, which is applicable within the EU and all affiliated nations in Europe and the Mediterranean Area. How are things working in *your* country? -- Best regards Ann Mette Heindorff (Mette) ------ Outgoing messages.checked with Norton AV General questions concerning the scope of copyright protection, whether in literary or artistic works, are simply not capable of being given answers of worldwide application. Even in countries of the European Union which are subject to the directive of 1993, it is left to individual countries to embody it in their domestic law (although, ultimately, interpretation may be the prerogative of the European Court). In the context posed by Mette, there may well be two copyrights, one vested in the original artist and another in the engraver of a printing plate bearing that image. It is very likely, therefore, that a postage stamp bearing an image of a painting is itself copyright. (As in GB stamps bearing the Machin head; Mette's example 2 is plain wrong.) Further one is entitled to assume that postal authorities who reproduce artistic works on stamps have obtained the necessary permission from the artist or his estate where it is still in copyright. Under the Berne Convention the duration of such copyrights is 50 years from the END of the year in which the copyright owner died (not from the date of his death). Under the imperative of "harmonisation" this became 70 years within the EU because that was the period applicable in Germany and the other countries had to fall in line. The "fair use" provisions, which incidentally were first applied under English law, are, in my personal view interpreted too strictly within the EU. The USA applies them much more sensibly and flexibly. There are also provisions in most jurisdictions for people threatened with an action for infringement to be able themselves to start an action for a declaration by the Court that the work in question does not possess copyright, but that is an expensive road to tread and the destination uncertain. However, I do not consider that Copy-Dan's claims that the original artist's copyright in his painting extends to its reproduction on postage stamps where such reproduction is done with the artist's permission, is wrong in law (caveat any express provision to the contrary in Danish law). My advice to Mette, for what it is worth, is that so long as she reproduces only stamp images as distinct from the original paintings, and so long as those images purporting to be mint and are in colour are `cancelled' in some way, e.g., by a line or arc in one corner, and so long as she makes it clear that she IS reproducing stamps that are, or were, on sale to the public, she should be free of interference from bodies such as Copy-Dan. Douglas |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Douglas Myall" skrev i en meddelelse
... - snip - My advice to Mette, for what it is worth, is that so long as she reproduces only stamp images as distinct from the original paintings, and so long as those images purporting to be mint and are in colour are `cancelled' in some way, e.g., by a line or arc in one corner, and so long as she makes it clear that she IS reproducing stamps that are, or were, on sale to the public, she should be free of interference from bodies such as Copy-Dan. Thanks for your advice Douglas. I have been discussing this with Copy-Dan for 2-3 years, and they insist that the copyright protection applies to *all* depictions -- also on stamps -- insofar the artist involved was still alive in 1935 or later. In other words, a rigid interpretation of the 70-year protection. They have sent me a plain ultimatum: "Remove the images and files listed, or pay 4,500 DKK (vat 25% included) per month to Copy-Dan for our permission, given on behalf of the estate". And they did include a formal invoice, well specified over some 10-12 pages! That leaves me no choice other than removing the files, does it? Mette |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"amesh" wrote in message k... This is an ooold question, raised by me about 2-3 years ago, but here goes again. I have recently been contacted by the Danish Copyright Organisation (Copy-Dan), who has notified me that according to European copyright legislation it is not allowed to show stamps or philatelic material on the Internet, insofar such stamps depict artworks by artists who were still alive within the latest 70 years. Such material may only be shown in public on condition that an explicit permission has been obtained from the artist's estate, or if a substantial due is paid to Copy-Dan to protect the estate's (or the still living artist's) legal rights. snip Further to my earlier post in reply to Mette's questions, perhaps I could make a couple of further points. 1. The last sentence of my penultimate paragraph had an intrusive `do not' which completely altered what I wished to say. It should have read as follows (I have taken the opportunity to add to it a bit): However, I consider that Copy-Dan's claims that the original artist's copyright in his painting extends to its reproduction on postage stamps where such reproduction is done with the artist's permission and to reproductions of such stamps for purely philatelic purposes other than for sale, is wrong in law (caveat any express provision to the contrary in Danish law). 2. Attempts to secure a further widening of the scope of protection within the EU so as to include an ability to prevent public exhibition are unlikely to succeed. They are certainly not covered by the present directive nor, as I know, are they prevented under UK domestic law.While the renting or lending of an artistic work to the public are `restricted acts' for which the artist's permission is required, the making of works available for a public exhibition is not renting or lending to the public. Also, galleries can lend works to each other without the consent of the artist whether or not the purpose of the loan is public exhibition. Galleries can prevent the public from taking photographs of the exhibits so long as they make this a condition of entry by printing it on the admission tickets. 3. It is true that in some foreign countries a `droite de suite' exists which entitles the artist to a payment on a resale of his work. It is also true that the European Commission is in favour of extending this right to countries of the Union for works of contemporary and modern art. Douglas |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Illegal Stamps - The Gambia (2003) | Blair (TC) | General Discussion | 1 | May 31st 05 09:17 PM |
Europa 2005 Issues celebrate Gastronomy | TC | General Discussion | 3 | May 2nd 05 10:37 AM |
Scented stamps | TC Blair | General Discussion | 9 | December 13th 04 10:10 PM |
Safety First (Part 2) | Rodney | General Discussion | 1 | December 9th 04 10:39 PM |
North Korea Philately | Blair (TC) | General Discussion | 0 | August 17th 04 04:19 PM |