Large Scale Central

What gives you the right?

General Discussion
#1

After reading a very interesting thread in the reference section it got me thinking. I have decided there are three types of people in the world with regard to media of any sort.

There are hoarders of information, there are disperser of information for a price, and there are those that freely disperse information. Who is right? How has the right?

As a researcher and modeler I have little regard for hoarders. Particular to modeling and researching old railroads hoarding information benefits no one. History is lost when people or even organization hoard information and are reluctant to disperse it.

On the other end of the scale I love those that freely disperse information. It is history and it should be readily shared. I believe history is the intellectually property of the people. Nothing should be with held if someone can learn about their past.

However, there are people like museums, educational institution, historical societies, authors, publishers and who knows who else that work very hard and spend a lot of money to collect organize and make available that history. They should expect compensation for their effort.

So where does that leave us. Forget the legality of copyright law, what is ethical. I have some photos that I would love to share with you all. I have already shared some information that probably isn’t mine to share. I am not a hoarder but I do respect the owners of the property and believe it is theirs to disseminate. They shared it with me in confidence that I would not let it out to the public. Mostly because I or the people i got them from do not have permission to share them.

Now that brings up another issue for me. Is it wrong to share for free a digital copy of an image I have regardless of where I got it. If I were to buy a CD and have you over to listen to it I am clearly with in my right. However I can not copy it and sell it to you. But can I copy it and give it to you. If you are the owner of a glass negative or original print of something and you scan it and give me a digital copy of it am I in violation of ethical code if I then make copies of it and give them to people. As an author I like knowing that in my book I am giving people previously unseen pictures. If I give them to people in digital format soon everyone that cares to have them has them and the picture is no longer special. As a modeler and research I believe it is my duty to do so.

It is a tough question. What right do we have to hoard information that should be the public’s for the benefit of history? What right do we have to distribute freely the work of others whether they are the original producer or the one who has taken on the endeavor to find and collect the information? What right do we have to charge for our work of compiling information produced by others such as does a museum, historical society, or author?

I don’t have the answers, its a tough one. Then you throw in whats actually legal, especially with regard to published information and pictures prior to 1923 that are public domain. Ahh so while our friend and his blueprints is a hoarder and I have no time for him… but I do understand a reluctance to give away what first may not be ethically or legally yours and second what someone else spent much resources compiling and shared with you.

End rant now

#2

Devon,

The answer is much simpler than you might wish to believe. I don’t disagree with your categorization of collectors. I do however find that most of the ‘Hoarders’ do so because the information they have collected is often gotten by ‘less than legitimate’ means and the distribution of said information would tend to be ‘uncomfortable’ should questions be asked.

You admitted that the folks who request a fee for their research and investment have that right to do so. A case in point is the John Maxwell Collection of D&RGW drawings. John spent many years acquiring and building his collection. He distributed them for a price, quite reasonable all things considered. It is my understanding, not something I can prove at this moment, that the Colorado Rail Road Museum currently has possession of the collection. They, to the best of my knowledge, are not making those available at this time. Unfortunate for many of us. The collection was either purchased from or donated by his estate, either way the CRRM is now owner and has control over their use.

I am a free sharer, of non-copyrighted material. The copyright laws are for the most part clear on what is and what is not copyrighted. If you read the copyright notice on almost every magazine drawing or diagram I have read, it very clearly states that the purchaser of the magazine may freely make copies for his/her own use. The emphasis here in on the fact that the copy permission is granted ONLY to the purchaser of the magazine. I think I can safely say that the vast majority of folks on this forum possess copyrighted material, but like me they are hesitant to ‘distribute’ that information. And that is the key word…distribution. One ONLY has the right to distribute information they own.

Photographs acquired from the internet, that are not otherwise watermarked or clearly stated as copyrighted, are considered to be in the public domain. Any photos, text, diagrams, etc. that are posted here on LSC are public domain and anyone may copy them freely. I believe that folks here on LSC will freely share what is OK for them to share. What one does in peer to peer environment is another topic entirely.

#3

Here we go with copyright law again. People, please spend some time and learn the truth about copyright laws, before you make some statements that are not in fact correct. There are a lot of incorrect assumptions about what you can do with a copyrighted item.

Just because a picture was published in/on a public forum, DOES NOT, give anyone the right to reuse that image, without permission of the copyright owner. The law is very clear on the point about usage is " OK as long as I don’t sell it or make a profit". Thought process. It is illegal, to distribute, in any form, copyrighted. Material without the permission of the owner. It also prohibited the making of derivatives from copyrighted material. Items DO NOT have to show the copyright symbol, to be covered under copyright laws.

It’s very simple, if you didn’t create it, ask for permission before using it. It will be granted most of the time.

#4

Bob,

I couldn’t agree more on every count. I am not pointing the finger at anyone. . . it is just a internal debate within me on what should be proper. I am writing a book. I expect to get paid for their distribution and I believe I am right in doing so. But at the same time I also love to share information. In fact one of my new friends is a competing author with a book already in print and about to have a second addition. I probably shouldn’t share any new information I have with him and he shouldn’t share with me… but I can’t help it. We both love the subject and we are glad to know someone with equal enthusiasm to share it with.

So that is the crux of my own personal dilemma. I understand the nature of people not wanting to share freely what they have spent money and effort collecting or more importantly created. But by the same token what fun is it to keep it to yourself.

Copyrights are whole other ballgame in my opinion. Most of the stuff I am interested is public domain. They quite simply are photos or written documents published prior to 1923. The original creator and copyright holder is long gone and noone has secured copyright to them. Even if they are part of a collection the individual print itself is not copyrighted only the collection as a whole. There is grey area but after talking to museums and publishers on the matter there is no teeth in trying to protect them. So that is why they hoard them. I am dealing wiht this regularlry in trying to get my book together. Once they are in the open there is no control.

But this brings up a ethical dilima for me. Once I pay them for scan or print it becomes mine and since they do not hold the copyright since ithas expired they are at my mercy. But do I want to play that card. Is it right to do so? I tend to error on the side of protecting my sources if I am not hte rightful owner of the original I am careful about giving it away.

#5

For someone who is an aspiring author my spelling and grammar are terrible. I better hire a good editor and proof reader.

#6

Dave, I heard a comment this morning I haven’t even looked at yet.

Is Facebook actually using pictures even if they are copyrighted?

Just a question.

#7

Dave Taylor said:
Here we go with copyright law again. People, please spend some time and learn the truth about copyright laws, before you make some statements that are not in fact correct. There are a lot of incorrect assumptions about what you can do with a copyrighted item. Just because a picture was published in/on a public forum, DOES NOT, give anyone the right to reuse that image, without permission of the copyright owner. The law is very clear on the point about usage is " OK as long as I don’t sell it or make a profit". Thought process. It is illegal, to distribute, in any form, copyrighted. Material without the permission of the owner. It also prohibited the making of derivatives from copyrighted material. Items DO NOT have to show the copyright symbol, to be covered under copyright laws. It’s very simple, if you didn’t create it, ask for permission before using it. It will be granted most of the time.

Dave your are 100% correct. As I have begun to navigate the world of publishing I have spent much time and effort devoted to understanding copyrighted info. Copyrights laws are confusing here in the U.S. never mind that thanks to the Internet you have to be careful about international copyrights.

I urge everyone to be very careful about distributing anything that you are not the original creator of. Even stuff on the internet. One challenge I am having in securing publishing rights and the internet is who is the rightful owner. Many times one can find the same photo or document on multiple sites. Who owns it. Step carefully is my warning because the original creator of rightful owner of the original is the one you need permission from unless the copyright has expired.

On that note public domain is sketchy area on what exactly is an expired copyright. Even the 1923 thing better be approached with caution. Just because you have an old photograph published prior to 1923 doesn’t automatically mean it is in public domain. The original owner could have renewed it. It is grey area. One I am doing my best to avoid. It is always safer to get permission from your source before distributing. And document it. That way if you use something you can at least try to use the defense “well I got it from them, and they gave me permission.” Still may not help.

#8

Dave, although you may be correct in your statements, then enlighten us how one is to contact the copyright owner to request permission when the largest majority of photos posted on the net have not contact information. I don’t disagree with your statements, however if the person is so concerned over the copyright then provide the necessary information required to make contact or don’t put it on the net.

There is a huge difference between theoretical and practical implementation.

#9

Google images rarely has copyright links.

I operate in General Good Faith, I am not making money and I trust those I share them with won’t either. I do so under the educational aspect.

Most places have low res images to take and high res to buy… I go for the freebies.

John

#10

Well here’s some food for thought… Most copyright’s have ‘educational’ exemptions. So the question becomes is a large scale forum an educational setting if one is sharing the information in an attempt to educate, and teach others? Or is education strictly defined as ‘public schools’.

#11

Craig, I think the word ‘formal’ comes to mind. In a structured setting.

#12

Bob “IA3R-7” Cope said:

Craig, I think the word ‘formal’ comes to mind. In a structured setting.

Okay so is a forum ‘formal’ if one conducts a build log, or shares the methods of construction? The education field struggles with this same idea. Is digital learning the same as brick and mortar learning?

#13

There is a very big difference between theoretical and practical implementation. Once it is on the net you have lost it. You no longer have control. That is why as John has said they will offer low res on the net and reserve higher res for purchase. It is the only way to stand a chance. Even then once sell a digital scan to some one you have lost control of it. That is reality. It is also why we run into such reluctance to share.

The reality is if it is on the net you have lost it. There again this to me is about ethics more than legal. I have some stuff that I am almost certain I can legally share with whomever I want. It is clearly in public domain. But it is not out to the public. I have copies that were given in good faith that I would keep them to myself and direct inquires to the owners. The main concern isn’t people seeing them, it that the will end up on the net and then they will no longer have the value they have as rare.

But that actually make me mad. Because if I were the owner I would want to give them to everyone. I don’t understand the mentality. I really don’t. Make them available for people to enjoy.

#14

I think some people are hoarders because they have been burned. They spent a lot of time and money acquiring a set of information, shared it with others with the understanding that it will not be shared farther, and then later somebody posts that same information as their own, giving no credit whatsoever for its source. That’s not ethical, courteous, or friendly. Why should one put out their stuff only to see others misuse it and pass it off as their own? You cannot get around what unethical people will do, but you can publish it formally, as in a book or a research journal, and then at least your work is on record as you want it, then others can misuse it at their peril. And yes, I do put low resolution images on the web and have made high res images available on request.

As an aside in this regard, have a look at www.denverrails.com The webmaster, Mike Stutz, is very careful to give credit where credit is due. I have given him a lot of my good vintage photos.

#15

Art,

I believe you are correct. That’s why I really lay no blame. I have already an untold amount of money, time and effort in my book with much more to come. would hate to share the transcript with someone only to have them distribute the information. So I do understand why they do it. Honestly I am a terrible author, just minutes ago I put a post on here about the CR&N #1. I, as far as I know, am the only one to have researched and put together the complete timeline and chain of custody for that loco. It is going n my book. Yet I let the cat out of the bag here. Well I guess we will all it a teaser. But I cant not share.

#16

Devon, I’ve been writing my book for almost 2 years without any hope of regaining all the $$$ I’ve put into it unless and until it is published when I can claim the expenses on my income taxes. Fortunately I have the time.

In the meantime, not one of the 350 images and maps and diagrams for the book will be seen by anyone except my co-author, the editor, and the reviewers - even though I have some wonderful and magnificent photos I’d love to post. Illustrations and images I’ve gotten from others have their written permission to use, and they will be given full credit for their contribution. That’s ethical.

#17

Devon, I’ve been writing my book for almost 2 years without any hope of regaining all the $$$ I’ve put into it unless and until it is published when I can claim the expenses on my income taxes. Fortunately I have the time.

In the meantime, not one of the 350 images and maps and diagrams for the book will be seen by anyone except my co-author, the editor, and the reviewers - even though I have some wonderful and magnificent photos I’d love to post. Illustrations and images I’ve gotten from others have their written permission to use, and they will be given full credit for their contribution. That’s ethical.

#18

Art,

I understand what your saying about recouping the cost. I would be tickled if I broke even with just the actual cash outlay. I don’t think you write books like these in hopes of recouping cost.

I am also being careful with most of the info. I do share some, maybe to much, with people but when it comes to the book I am protective. I am a student right now but I have a week and a half left in my semester then I am taking a year off to write the book. I would say about half the research is done. I have a deadline. It needs to be printed and ready for sale by Sept 2016. I have given myself a year to write it. Publisher says they need 6 months to make the deadline as a conservative number. This is my first book and it is not the most fun process I am beginning to find out.

Hopefully it pans out. The publisher I am working with hasn’t committed and I believe will actually be backing out. So I am already looking for alternatives. I have resolved myself to writing it no matter what. It may never be more than a manuscript collecting cyber-dust on my computer. I certainly hope not though.

And as for anything going in the book I will have written permission for everything I include and everything will be cited. If I don’t have permission it wont be there. it doesn’t matter about public domain or not. I wont go down that road. i just firmly believe If I am going to sell information I had better have permission and give credit.

#19

Good luck to you with your book, Devon!!! I have a contract with a bonus clause in it if I can meet a 2 year deadline. A book isn’t making money for anyone - the publisher or the author - no matter how little while it sits in the computer. Take a lesson from my favorite author, Wallace Stegner: during your year off, “rub words together” each morning, and be ruthless in your own self criticism. Set yourself some deadlines and stick to them. You’ll make mistakes along the way, but learn by them, and don’t make the same mistake twice or you aren’t learning.

#20

Art Sylvester said:

Good luck to you with your book, Devon!!! I have a contract with a bonus clause in it if I can meet a 2 year deadline. A book isn’t making money for anyone - the publisher or the author - no matter how little while it sits in the computer. Take a lesson from my favorite author, Wallace Stegner: during your year off, “rub words together” each morning, and be ruthless in your own self criticism. Set yourself some deadlines and stick to them. You’ll make mistakes along the way, but learn by them, and don’t make the same mistake twice or you aren’t learning.

Great advice Art. Thank you