Do you think some should have a copyright photo on a coin you own?

Opinions?
I seldom check PM's but do check emails often jason@seated.org
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
0
Comments
<< <i>If you bought the coin in a major auction someone already has a copyright photo of the piece. You need the auction house's permission to use that photo, however you can take one yourself. >>
Diddo. You can't use theirs, but you can take your own once you have the coin.
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
Seems odd, but that's the legal standpoint.
Dwayne F. Sessom
Ebay ID: V-Nickel-Coins
<< <i>What about when someone photographs your coins without your knowledge while they are looking at them and uses that data to create a database you then have to pay to access and or generates revenue?
Eric >>
This would depend upon whether they were on public display, or a private viewing. Public display falls into "Public Domain" laws, but with a private display, the photographer would need your written permission to photograph your coins for personal gain.
Dwayne F. Sessom
Ebay ID: V-Nickel-Coins
<< <i> Even if a photographer takes a photo of YOU in a public place (the legal term is "Public Domain"), the photographer still owns copyrights to the photo.
Seems odd, but that's the legal standpoint. >>
Unless that is, the person has copyrighted themselves like that Alaskan ex-governor recently did for herself and her daughter. Now they are afforded some means of keeping their visages out of tabloids.
<< <i>Thread Title: Do you think some should have a copyright photo on a coin you own? >>
You ask a general question, you get a general answer. They do if they took the photo.
<< <i>What about some sort of "scan"? One you did not know was being made perhaps?
Eric >>
Same rules apply.
<< <i>So, if you give me your coin to examine over the weekend, I photograph it without your knowledge and then figure a way to make money off it - that's ok with you? >>
It's not a matter of whether it's OK with me. It's a matter of the Copyright Act.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>What about some sort of "scan"? One you did not know was being made perhaps?
Eric >>
In reality, why does it matter? They can only claim rights to their images of the coin and not someone else's. It certainly doesn't prevent you from acquiring your own images.
on second thought:
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>PCGS owns the copyrights to all the images they take of other peoples coins. They even use them however they like. This 1931-D FS-101 DDO image is used in Coin Facts, and they didn't ask to use it there. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. I don't think they need your permission either; I think they only need permission on "things" but they do need permission of people when they are not in a large group. >>
But if you pay PCGS [and others who offer photo services here] a fee does that give you unlimited right to display those images any time, anywhere or any place?
<< <i>What about when someone photographs your coins without your knowledge while they are looking at them and uses that data to create a database you then have to pay to access and or generates revenue?
Eric >>
Where does this happen without your knowledge? The submisison form you sign normally gives permission.
<< <i>
<< <i>PCGS owns the copyrights to all the images they take of other peoples coins. They even use them however they like. This 1931-D FS-101 DDO image is used in Coin Facts, and they didn't ask to use it there. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. I don't think they need your permission either; I think they only need permission on "things" but they do need permission of people when they are not in a large group. >>
But if you pay PCGS [and others who offer photo services here] a fee does that give you unlimited right to display those images any time, anywhere or any place? >>
Even though, I paid for the service on my coin shown above, I can't use it however I want. I am sure there are limits to what it can be used for.
Also I meant to say, "I don't think they need permission on things, but they do need permission of people when they are not in a large group."
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
<< <i>I did NOT know it was ok to image/scan or whatever someones property without their knowledge and use that to create a revenue generating device. >>
You're too mushy. Nobody said that. We answered the copyright question, only. You're inferring too much from our answers.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>What about when someone photographs your coins without your knowledge while they are looking at them and uses that data to create a database you then have to pay to access and or generates revenue?
Eric >>
Where does this happen without your knowledge? The submisison form you sign normally gives permission. >>
Ahhh. I was speaking generally. You speak of this photo service. OK. Gotta love that name - submission...
Eric >>
Since you are speaking generally, I dont see how this happens. You give your coin or other item to someone. You should know what they are doing with it. If they said they wanted to research and study said item then imaged it and sold those images, yes you have an issue. I took some of your prior comments with inference to grading companies. Grading companies and not taking images without your permission.
<< <i>Grading companies [are?] not taking images without your permission. >>
And, therein lies the rub. If you can submit the coin under an express reservation, you may have a contract claim. That's not going to happen, though, of course. Why? Because the TPGs have lawyers and they're bright enough to see that coming and make provisions for it in their take-it-or-leave-it terms of submission.
E
<< <i>
<< <i> Even if a photographer takes a photo of YOU in a public place (the legal term is "Public Domain"), the photographer still owns copyrights to the photo.
Seems odd, but that's the legal standpoint. >>
Unless that is, the person has copyrighted themselves like that Alaskan ex-governor recently did for herself and her daughter. Now they are afforded some means of keeping their visages out of tabloids. >>
Not necessarily. There are "fair use" exceptions to people who attempt to protect their names and image likenesses and news media is one of those exceptions. Sarah Palin can copyright her name but the media does not need her permission to carry news stories about her.
<< <i>By law, a photographer owns copyright to all photographs they produce. It doesn't matter if the photo is of a coin YOU own, they still have copyrights to THEIR work which is the photograph itself. Even if a photographer takes a photo of YOU in a public place (the legal term is "Public Domain"), the photographer still owns copyrights to the photo.
Seems odd, but that's the legal standpoint. >>
All true with one exception. If a photograph is deemed "generic", then it cannot be copyrighted. If I stand outside the White House and take a picture of it (from the same vantage point that everyone else uses), then an artist or illustrator could use my photograph to create a piece of artwork and it's perfectly legal.
The photograph in question must have some defining characteristic about it that makes it unique. Otherwise, one could take the image, carefully crop it again and then use some image software to slightly alter reflections, shadows, etc. (on the holder, not the coin) and make it impossible for the photographer to prove its his picture.
<< <i>But if you pay PCGS [and others who offer photo services here] a fee does that give you unlimited right to display those images any time, anywhere or any place? >>
Not implicitly, but if the photographer grants you a license to reproduce the images, then you may do so under the terms of that license, which may specify such things as a maximum image size or that a specific copyright notice remain intact. The photographer still holds the copyright, however. No different than a portrait studio would do for pictures of your family. I believe a blanket use reproduction license is included in PCGS's fee. It is in mine, and I won't speak for others, but paying someone for pictures you aren't allowed to post somewhere sort of defeats the purpose of having it done.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Even if a photographer takes a photo of YOU in a public place (the legal term is "Public Domain"), the photographer still owns copyrights to the photo.
Seems odd, but that's the legal standpoint. >>
Unless that is, the person has copyrighted themselves like that Alaskan ex-governor recently did for herself and her daughter. Now they are afforded some means of keeping their visages out of tabloids. >>
Not necessarily. There are "fair use" exceptions to people who attempt to protect their names and image likenesses and news media is one of those exceptions. Sarah Palin can copyright her name but the media does not need her permission to carry news stories about her. >>
How can anyone copyright a name ? There will be dozens of Sarah Palins in the world , just not all as gleekit as her.
Not that I'm saying that PCGS and CoinFacts do things like that. I have no idea. But there are some issues worthy of consideration, at the least.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Great question! All sorts of possibilities come up...you always have such neat angles...you play Billiards? Probably 3 cushions!
Best wishes,
Eric
If they took the photo and your agreement with them didn't negate their ability to do so, absolutely.