Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2016 20:19:17 GMT
I recently noticed that Wiki was not accepting any picture submissions for Belgian stamp issued after 1945. I found further information on other countries HERE
The rules are quite varied by countries, some go back 50-70 years others 20-30years. Some allow the use for educational purposes others only for advertising.
All very confusing, particularly for such a common product where so many were produced
|
|
|
|
Post by jkjblue on Aug 15, 2016 3:25:04 GMT
It looks like the stamp artist (artist's legal heirs) can hold the copyright of the stamp image (work of art) for 70 years after the artist's death for a number of countries (example: France).
The rules for various countries and copyright vary widely, however. Thanks for the link.
I'm glad I "just" publish stamp images for my blog from 1840-1940. ;-)
That gives me a 76 year cushion minimum from date of stamp publication.
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by jkjblue on Aug 15, 2016 3:47:04 GMT
I could see a "worst case scenario" of copyright lasting some 140 years after a stamp publication (work of art)...The artist living some ~70 years after the stamp publication, and then the 70 years after the artist's death.  |
|
scb
Member 
Inactive
Now at 100,000+ worldwide stamps, and progressing one stamp at a time towards the 200K
Posts: 313 
|
Post by scb on Aug 15, 2016 7:35:29 GMT
Familiar page; have been (and referenced) it number of times on various 'copyright related' talks. The background discussions make an interesting background read as well - commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Stamps/Public_domain At one point Wikipedia was planning to remove ALL images of German stamps because of copyright practices - talk about insanity of it. Anyway, Wikipedia's copyright practices is one of the reasons why I blog instead of putting stuff on Wikipedia. Another major reason is that in order for some detail to end up on Wikipedia, it has to become from creditable source. so basically any kind of 'new research' is worthless unless it is published on established magazine or book. And yes, blogs or forums (or websites in general) do not count as creditable source in terms of Wiki editors. It definitely makes Wikipedia a poor playground for stamp collector who likes to record and share new information. Personally I add 'The designs of stamps and postmarks are copyright of issuing postal authorities and their designers' to my blog and live with it/consequences that might come (that said, I have specifically asked permission from few postal authorites; quickest response took about 5 minutes; the longest was about 3 months). If I were using Blogspot/Blogger/Wordpress.com then I might have a different approach as their TOS are pretty strict on use of copyrighted content/media, and blogs have vanished for much smaller violations. -k- |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 15:16:04 GMT
Some things are not so important to them.
I recently noticed a very obvious well known forgery posted as a genuine and I sent a notice.
Very much like eBay they said it was not their concern - maybe I should take it up with the author (not as simple as sending an eBay seller a notice)
I used to post on Stamp Smarter when it started with the late Bill Weiss and at first many would change their postings but as time went on they figured out that eBay wasn't going to do anything so why worry.
I started getting answers like; "If it's not genuine, I have a 30 day guarantee" or " It's up to the buyer to decide if it is genuine" or in the case of high value issues "Well it's certified, so if a buyer wants proof, I'll send it"
Anyway, I stick to 1840-1940 like jkj and I don't send notices anymore - "Caveat Emptor"
|
|
