[Clipart] clipart Digest, Vol 60, Issue 31

Greg Bulmash oneminuteinspirations at gmail.com
Thu Mar 19 16:46:28 PDT 2009

I think the Dover books make the same claim as the usf.edu site.  That's 
why I haven't vectorized anything out of a Dover book.

But I think there's a real difference between saying:

"These are Public Domain works"


"These are copyrighted works derived from Public Domain works"

If you say the first in a prominent place on the page where you display 
the artwork(s), then put the second in the fine print, it's a bit of 
bait and switch.  It sucks, but the safest route is to just back off.

- Greg

John Olsen wrote:
> Seems if something is stated as being PD, then it is PD at least from  
> our legal position.  And I would not worry unless we got a request to  
> remove them.  Then it would be a matter of the requester proving some  
> proof of ownership.  Having a statement saying the images are public  
> domain and from prior to 1923 does not seem like a good way to make a  
> case for ownership.  I have seen one site that claims the work they  
> have done in scanning and cleaning up public domain images now make  
> them their property http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/ .
> "It is true that the original drawings that many items in this  
> collection are based on have long passed into the public domain.  
> However, by the time we have scanned, cropped, cut out backgrounds,  
> fixed broken lines, simplified, sharpened, and otherwise cleaned up  
> the original drawing, the result is a new artwork derived from the  
> earlier drawing. The derivative work is protected by copyright even  
> though the original is in the public domain."
> This is a questionable argument as the SCOTUS has ruled that  
> reproducing an image of a public domain item does not make the image  
> of the item now a copyrightable item.  I suppose I could make the same  
> claim on the things I scan.  Indeed I can find the original sources  
> for many of their files.  So it would merely be a matter for me to  
> scan them and place them directly in OCAL.  All in all, I think it is  
> a weak argument.
> As to wpclipart, I know we have worked back and forth with this site -  
> a lot of images that are there were obtained from OCAL.  Keep in mind  
> these sites could just as likely be getting images from us as we  
> getting them from their sites.
> John Olsen
> On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:08 PM, clipart-request at lists.freedesktop.org  
> wrote:
>> ------------------------------
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:36:52 +0100
>> From: Joanna Pszenicyn <papapishu at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Clipart] - Possible Violation?
>> To: clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>> Message-ID:
>> 	<37214d760903191336i4674742fk1e9db1eca33f75d6 at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> Nicu Buculei wrote:
>>> I am not the person who flagged it, but I suspect is about this:
>>> http://karenswhimsy.com/image-ordering.shtm#terms<http://karenswhimsy.com/image-ordering.shtm#terms 
>> We have about 7 images from that page, mainly angel wings, as  
>> searching for
>> "karenswhimsy" shows.
>> We also have many images from wpclipart.com (search for  
>> "wpclipart"), and
>> his terms of use are:
>> [...]
>> These images are public domain (PD), and that means they can be used  
>> and
>> edited for whatever purpose you wish, personal or commercial. No
>> attrribution or linking is required, (although a link would be  
>> nice...)
>> I only make one request:
>> My website is mine. I do not expect anyone to copy my site or the  
>> image
>> collection (in large part) to host online or sell. This would  
>> compete with
>> my site, draining what revenue I generate through online ads. These  
>> pay for
>> hosting and modestly compensate me all the ink I use in test  
>> printing and
>> for the hundreds of hours I spend finding, creating and editing  
>> images.
>> [...]
>> What is the difference between this statement and that from  
>> karenswhimsy?
>> Karen, the owner of karenswhimsy, also calls her collection "Public  
>> Domain",
>> but then adds some restrictions. Yeah, I know that she has right to  
>> do so,
>> but why write on top of the page
>> http://karenswhimsy.com/public-domain-images/:
>> "WELCOME! :: You have arrived at the main page for my *public domain  
>> images*.
>> On the following pages you will find hundreds of beautiful images  
>> gleaned
>> from my collection of old books, magazines, and postcards. They are  
>> all from
>> material printed prior to 1923 and are in the public domain."
>> It is at least misleading :(
>> So, should delete at once all images from karenswhimsy.com or only  
>> tag them
>> as pd_issue? And what about wpclipart? _Do_ we have a permission for  
>> every
>> single image, or do we just feel that the words "[...] That said, if  
>> you
>> wish to include the collection within a GPL-ed Linux distribution or  
>> create
>> a package for that distribution, you are more than welcome to do so.  
>> I am a
>> big proponent of Open Source [...]" are a "general" permission?????
>> Somewhat lost again,
>> Papapishu
>> set=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
> _______________________________________________
> clipart mailing list
> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart

More information about the clipart mailing list