to copy or not to copy? <S>

[TAMMY L. SULLIVAN <SULLITL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Vaughan,

Here go all the worms ... all over the floor  <ggg>.  Once you snap the
shutter, YOU own the copyright.  I work for another photographer sometimes and
he is a firm believer that those images that *I* took, are MY images.  Sure, he
can use them and that's our agreement.  But once you take that picture, bingo! 
You own the copyright.  There are so many variables involved unfortunately. 
There's really no cut and dry answer for all questions.  But what IS certain is
the fact that if I took one of your images that had a copyright stamp on the
back, went to my local Wal-Mart, they are supposed to look for that and if they
see a copyright stamp they WILL NOT copy it.  A person I know did that with an
old wedding picture of his and Wal-Mart checked for that.  There was no
copyright stamp and since the image was over 20 years old, they went ahead and
made him another copy (no negative).

Sure, we can make all the excuses we want about the fact that something may/may
not be copyrighted ... etc., but we are not selling it for the purpose of
making money, what we want to gain is knowledge.  You can really make an
argument for both sides really.  <g>  When someone copies a wedding picture
because they don't want to come back to me and pay the $20 for the 8x10 ....
then they are not using the photo for their personal knowledge but to purposely
undermine me.  

The Book wasn't written by Kodak, nor does it have a reference to Kodak.  There
are some b/w infrared photographs in the book of Kodak research members.  

My mind hurts now thinking about all this stuff.  Too complicated ... let's get
back to talking about infrared images!  

Tammy

------------------------------

Topic No. 8