A question about posting an antique store photo

[BUFFIE]

Hello

I have come across a great B&W photo of a Sumpter Valley RY steam engine that I found in an antique store. Would it be appropriate to scan such photo and post if I stated that the photographer was unknown?

Thanks

[miningcamper1]

There is always some risk that someone will make a copyright infringement claim. Even the large online archives hedge a bit by stating "No known copyright restrictions".

If you own the print, and it's quite old, you are probably somewhat safer. Some who post old photos rely on the Fair Use Doctrine, but someone could still challenge that.

I'd love to know how often someone is actually sued for damages arising from an infringement claim!

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by BUFFIE

Hello

I have come across a great B&W photo of a Sumpter Valley RY steam engine that I found in an antique store. Would it be appropriate to scan such photo and post if I stated that the photographer was unknown?

Thanks

From RP's guidelines -

1. Please only upload photos that you have taken, or that you have the legal right to display (such as those passed down from a family member, those where you have legal possession of the original, etc.). We take copyright violations very seriously!
----------------------------------------------------

Several people I know go to train shows and there are boxes of B/W prints and he usually buys a few. They are usually VG quality and could be scanned well unlike some I have seen recently here but doubt that even if the owner were still alive, still had the original negative or proof of ownership they would assert any claim. However, as I read the guidelines, even if you knew the photographer's name, that would not be sufficient.

Bob

[bigbassloyd]

I would be very hesitant to post it on your account. By the RP guidelines, you do not have possession of the original (because prints are a copy). If someone tried to upload a print that they purchased of mine I would absolutely go after them and win easily. Granted, your print is much older but someone, somewhere probably has a claim to it.

Loyd L.

[BUFFIE]

Thanks for the guidance guys

I'll not post it, as I would not want to create an issue should someone claim the rights to it.

Cheers

DB

[Grewup on the CW]

What about original slides and photographer is unknown?

[RobJor]

Originally Posted by Grewup on the CW

What about original slides and photographer is unknown?

PhotoID: 685710 Photograph © Roger Lalonde

I am going to guess someone will say the original photographer still owns the rights but a lot of these will be traders and can't really see anyone making a claim?

Just use collection in search.

Bob

[bigbassloyd]

Originally Posted by Grewup on the CW

What about original slides and photographer is unknown?

If you hold the original then you're less likely to run into issues by posting it. This would be especially true for older content.

Loyd L.

[Dennis A. Livesey]

I appreciate the concern here for copyright. Since we are all photographers, that
should come as no surprise. Like all of you, I do not like it at all when anyone uses my photo without permission or credit when they easily could have gotten it.

However, I think it nuts to think we cannot share a found photo. If the poster has made a good faith effort to find the owner or photographer, states that the photo ownership is not known and does not claim it as their own, nor makes any money for posting it here, what is the problem?

And in fact, suppose the owner does show up? What are they going to do really? Sue for a million dollars? There is no money this and a lawyer would cost more than any fee that could possibly be collected.

I know that all I can do in a non-commercail situation is say take it down. I am not going to hire a lawyer to take down an RPer. On the other hand, if it were a commercial situation, cha-ching, then a lawyer would make sense.

And you possibly will do a service. Maybe someone will see the photo and has information about it and it can be connected back to the photographer or their family.

Does anybody have any actual experince in this?

[ShortlinesUSA]

I see what others are saying, but I tend to side with Dennis on this one. Someone somewhere sold that photo to the antique store, and knew they were parting with it (whether the original photographer or a family member...I guess we could argue whether a family member had the legal right to sell it here on the People's Court). I have seen this happen many times with slide traders over the years-- they find their work online or elsewhere after a slide they traded away makes it somewhere and someone publishes it.

I did what BUFFIE was asking about with a family photo that was passed down to me because of my interest in trains. It was taken by a professional photographer now that I think about it, but I see it as our family's property and something I shared here for pure enjoyment, not compensation. This is a flatbed scanned 8x10, FWIW.

PhotoID: 563965 Photograph © Michael Derrick

[Dennis A. Livesey]

Great shot and exactly the type to be shared even if you do not technically own it.
I would say the RP rules are more concerned about current or recent photographs. Photos that were taken before say 1960 are unlikely to be owned by anyone currently posting.

[John West]

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey

Photos that were taken before say 1960 are unlikely to be owned by anyone currently posting.

I object to that!

[RobJor]

Objection!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey View Post
Photos that were taken before say 1960 are unlikely to be owned by anyone currently posting.
I object to that!
__________________
John West

LOL, at least was not phrased another way, but the plus side is although I have looked at your photos before this prompted another look!!

The curiosity with this one, if this was 3rd People's choice I'd like to see one and two, probably a rare Tehachapi shot.

https://www.railpictures.net/photo/388493/

Bob

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey

Photos that were taken before say 1960 are unlikely to be owned by anyone currently posting.

That most certainly does not mean that someone did not inherit or buy the rights to a photo.

[Dennis A. Livesey]

There are reasons why I am not a lawyer, a politician or a Great Man of any sort. I am simply a guy thinking out loud just like anyone else here.

So let me rephrase: "Photos taken before 1960 that were taken anyone posting online today are very small in number."

John West is, of course, an exception. He knows I am jealous that he was taking such good shots at the same time I was shooting garbage.

[John West]

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey

There are reasons why I am not a lawyer, a politician or a Great Man of any sort. I am simply a guy thinking out loud just like anyone else here.

So let me rephrase: "Photos taken before 1960 that were taken anyone posting online today are very small in number."

John West is, of course, an exception. He knows I am jealous that he was taking such good shots at the same time I was shooting garbage.

Yeah, but now I am stuck looking at how much better railroad photography has become since back in the day, and I am stuck back in the pack with no hope of catching up.

Mutual jealousy!

[miningcamper1]

Originally Posted by John West

Yeah, but now I am stuck looking at how much better railroad photography has become since back in the day, and I am stuck back in the pack with no hope of catching up.

Mutual jealousy!

They may have better cameras, but they don't have time-travel machines!
[Except of course for a very few places, like Durango or Chama.]

[Joe the Photog]

I am currently dealing with an antique store that I found selling two of my images. When you buy from such a place, you are taking a leap of faith that the store owner is not just finding images he likes off line and printing them off and selling them. These two shots he is selling have never been sold by me

[Dennis A. Livesey]

Joe, that is crazy.

I don't know what is worse:

Someone selling your stuff without your permission.

Or that your stuff is in an antique store.

[Joe the Photog]

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey

Joe, that is crazy.

I don't know what is worse:

Someone selling your stuff without your permission.

Or that your stuff is in an antique store.

The ironic thing is that one of the shots he was selling was from March of this year. SMH