developed-responsibility
- +

Author Topic: Derivative Works?  (Read 1539 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mchlk

  • DCM Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: 0
    • Heymikey.org
Derivative Works?
« on: September 12, 2010, 07:05:48 AM »
Hello, I am new around here so I thought I'd buy a clue and ask a few questions.

On the front page of the site a blurb says "All files here have been researched by our staff and users to make sure they are copyright free and in the public domain."

Can I take this to mean the scans themselves are in the public domain, or are the source materials only in the public domain and the scans considered as copyrighted by the scanner?  Basically is this site like archive.org where someone can download a PD work remix it or use bits of it in their own projects and not irritate folks?

I'm guessing nothing here is considered Creative Commons as I don't see any Creative Commons notices anywhere, but I thought I'd ask.

I have some table top rpg projects in mind and would dearly love to use some pre-code Crime/Horror comics ask artwork.

Thanks

--michael

Digital Comic Museum

Derivative Works?
« on: September 12, 2010, 07:05:48 AM »

Offline John C

  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: 3
    • John's Blog
Re: Derivative Works?
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2010, 08:04:43 AM »
The consensus around here among the scanners tends to be that, since the content is merely a reproduction of a work (even when scans have been repaired or otherwise modified), the scanner has no rights to the scan (legally, this is backed by a clip art case against Corel, as I recall, which held that labor, costs, and reconstruction don't constitute "original art" to be protected).

Many, however, would still appreciate hearing from you, rather than having some anonymous guy making money off their labor.  It's a small community, here, so there's a bit less of a "catch and release" mentality than you'd find with, say, Project Gutenberg or the Internet Archive.  Legally, you don't have to, but the courtesy undoubtedly goes a long way, anyway.

Beyond that, the only advice I would give (and it's not legal advice, lest Bar Association Ninjas attack while I sleep...) is that, while we do check the copyright status of the books, you should double-check it and keep records of everything.  Should you get a Cease and Desist letter in the (e-)mail, "someone else said they checked," isn't going to make anybody go away.  That's blood in the water, as far as they're going to be concerned.

Best of luck, Michael, and I'm sure we'd all like to get a peek at where the product's going, should you care to get involved in the community here.

Offline mchlk

  • DCM Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Karma: 0
    • Heymikey.org
Re: Derivative Works?
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2010, 09:04:13 AM »
I gotcha, thanks for the reply.

If any of my rpg ideas get legs, I'll be sure to ask scanners for their
blessing before using artwork.

In addition I will do my own PD search.

Any suggestions on that other than the Copyright Office website ?

Thanks

--michael


Offline John C

  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: 3
    • John's Blog
Re: Derivative Works?
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2010, 01:33:50 PM »
Oh, sorry.  I've been doing this too long.

Yes, the Copyright Office only holds renewals from 1978 to the present.  For anything prior to that (that is, renewals for anything published in 1950 or earlier), you need to sift through the Catalog of Copyright Entries for that year.  Links are here:

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/

Each page links to a full, monstrous scan on Google Books.  Plus, at the bottom of each page, there are standalone, indexed scans of just the renewals (for non-periodicals and then periodicals), which I find more convenient for most checking, and Project Gutenberg OCRed files, which I don't quite trust, given the high accuracy required to be useful.

And of course, an extremely wise and careful person would also (hire someone to) head to the Library of Congress itself to inspect the records from which these were compiled, since mistakes can be made and the physical records are (rather close to literally) law.  Personally, though, I'm neither that wise nor careful, and wouldn't be until I was making enough money that a lawyer's hourly research rate was a reasonable item to budget for the project.