Sadiq-
I thought that Robert was complaining about Jon using his scanned images. Of course Robert doesn't have any copyright on a catalog that was published long ago, but if he went to the trouble of scanning it, expending time, expertise and energy, aren't those images protected?
John Barron Minneapolis
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:07:57 -0500
From: "Sadiq Gill" <sadiqgill@gmail.com>
To: "R.S. Broderick" <rsb000@hotmail.com>
Cc: Dale Brown <oroboyz@aol.com>
Cc: "classicrendezvous@bikelist.org" <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: Re: [CR]An Open Letter To Jon Fischer / VeloBase And The CR List
Message-ID: <c76dc510802181407q72356e90w19c3690c55b46413@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c76dc510802181353ic40350ai5d3d61f1b4d19110@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BLU135-W439A750EF37CEAC0B35C2E85210@phx.gbl>
<BAY109-W41B2C5C726BBB39BF354EC9C210@phx.gbl>
<c76dc510802181353ic40350ai5d3d61f1b4d19110@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message: 9
Mr. Broderick.....
Although I can appreciate that you are pissed at someone for hijacking
your effort and not to burst your proverbial bubble.....but---as someone who
kinda sorta does some of this for a living---I think your copyright analysis
is flawed for several reasons. First and foremost, old catalogs may or may
not be copyrighted depending upon their country of origin and how all of
that was handled here in the states (if at all). I am guessing that much is
public domain either by time or non-enforcement. Secondly, even if the work
is properly copyrighted and you have a obtained permissive use, it is not
your copyright to enforce. As a permissive user you have no rights other
than those of your limited license. Lastly, and probably most fatal to the
whole analysis is the fair use exception--which I would hazard a guess that
parts and public sales info falls well within for the purpose of what the
the VeloBase web site is undertaking. The fact of the matter is that the
catalogs when issued or distributed had little or no commercial value. The
value of the material was collateral to the parts and bikes that were being
sold and distributed. Take a look at :
*Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation* (280 F.3d 934 (CA9 2002) *withdrawn*,
re-filed at 336 F.3d 811(CA9 2003). Has to do with a search engine
publishing thumbnails of a photographer's work; but, directly analogous to
this set of facts.
Take care,