[Clipart] clipart Digest, Vol 60, Issue 31

[John Olsen]

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