[Clipart] clipart Digest, Vol 60, Issue 31
johnny_automatic at mac.com
Thu Mar 19 16:58:20 PDT 2009
We haven't put Dover out of business yet? I need to get busy and scan
more stuff. :)
On Mar 19, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Greg Bulmash wrote:
> 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
>> 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
>>> 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
>>> <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:
>>> 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
>>> 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
>>> I only make one request:
>>> My website is mine. I do not expect anyone to copy my site or the
>>> 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
>>> What is the difference between this statement and that from
>>> 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
>>> "WELCOME! :: You have arrived at the main page for my *public
>>> domain images*.
>>> On the following pages you will find hundreds of beautiful images
>>> 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,
>>> set=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>> clipart mailing list
>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
"The world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness. "
-- Annie Savoy in Bull Durham
More information about the clipart