Public Domain issue

[MrBern]

In WWII, the late Thomas Clifton posed for a poster for Home Front Rationing. "Do With Less So They'll Have Enough."

Now the image has been co-opted for snarky gift items.
Same image, but the caption reads: "How About a Cup of Shut the (expletive) Up"

Family complains...
"The Army advised me that images taken by the Army become public domain, so there is not much that can be done,

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=525783

 

[Roger]

If it's out there we have to respect the law. Can we have copyrights go on for infinity? I hope not. But, now we're getting into politics.

 

[Benny Holiday]

Common decency and ethics

Still, you'd think that people would respect the feelings of Mr Clifton's family, that's just common decency. Of course, that's not how those seeking the corporate dollar operate. I fiond it sadly unethical.

 

[MrBern]

If it's out there we have to respect the law. Can we have copyrights go on for infinity? I hope not. But, now we're getting into politics.

Politics? No, just legalities.
A lawyer might contest that the model posed in good faith 60 years ago, but the new application of the image might require a new contract.

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

I believe that a copyright lasts for 75 years before it becomes public domain. Considered to be reasonably long enough for any interested parties to have passed. But apparently this is not the case here, as it was the U.S. government that held the original copyright. I should think that any surviving family members could apply for a new copyright, and thus put a stop to unwanted use of this image.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

There is precedent!

the Alberto Korda photograph of Che Guevara (the famous one we've all seen) was being used by Smirnoff vodka. He challenged, and it was upheld, that the use of the image was damaging to the reputation of Guevara and completely against what he stood for.

Smirnoff was forced to seek Korda's permission to use the image (of course it was not given).

The same could be done here? Depends who's the copyright holder.

bk

 

[RedShoesGirl]

the Alberto Korda photograph of Che Guevara (the famous one we've all seen) was being used by Smirnoff vodka. He challenged, and it was upheld, that the use of the image was damaging to the reputation of Guevara and completely against what he stood for.

Smirnoff was forced to seek Korda's permission to use the image (of course it was not given).

The same could be done here? Depends who's the copyright holder.

bk

the copyright holder is generally the photographer and is valid for 75 years after his/her death. if the army was the employer of the photographer and was done on army time, then the army holds the copyright to the image. the model has nothing to do with copyright.

but, in the case of commercial images the model must sign a release for the image to be used commercially. but again, if the person was in the army then the army can say what is done with the image.

BUT, the family may have a case if the person in the image did not sign a model release for commercial use, which cheap goods are - time to talk with an attorney.

i am all for infinite copyright, but those that abuse it, like lifting images off one website for use on another, will still abuse it.

rsg

 

[Story]

Another artificial emotional outburst.

"Needless to say, I was horrified," said Phillips, who said she was told of the change by a friend who saw the Web site's image of her father advertised on another site, MySpace.com.

Marc Cowlin, public relations manager for CafePress, did not respond to a second inquiry about the product. In an e-mail response to an initial inquiry, he wrote, "All of the merchandise sold on CafePress is designed by our users, and our current catalog consists of over 35 million products."

Phillips feels the modern poster is derogatory, and she has contacted the U.S. Army, and local and state representatives about it.


Translation: "Wah wah wah, I'll STFU if I get some of the loot". That modified image has been around on the 'net since 2001 (I know 'cause I've seen a privately printed one hanging up since 2002), and NOW she's complaining. Uh huh.