AUS-VIC-WESTERN-DISTRICT-L Archives

Archiver > AUS-VIC-WESTERN-DISTRICT > 2002-09 > 1031907396


From: Robyn Waymouth <>
Subject: Re: [AUS-VIC-West] Privacy
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 18:56:36 +1000
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020912004210.00a2b120@localhost> <03c101c25a48$5c703d80$77be8a90@rasbc40>


Hi,
The photographer owns the copyright, and yes, you do have to find him/her and get
consent before you can publish. There is a time limit, but I've forgotten the
details. The Commonwealth Copyright Act is bound to be online - do a Google search
and check it out. If the photograher was an employee and was taking photos as part
of his/her job, then the employer owns the copyright. If you can't locate the
photographer you would have to include a statement saying that you have searched and
offering whatever reimbursement would have been required had you received consent.
But you really do have to look, this isn't an easy way out.
Regards,
Robyn

Beth Codling wrote:

> An excellent point to raise Lex. I think we will all benefit from anyone who
> can give a valid legal viewpoint.
>
> Thanks for raising it.
>
> On another slightly similar line of enquiry . . . Who owns the copyright on
> photographs taken by a professional photographer? Surely it must be the
> person that employed the photographer to take photos of that family event
> e.g. wedding especially if the person prepaid for a package of album etc?
> Would one have to get copyright clearance from the photographer to include
> such a photo in the family history book? Surely not!
>
> Any knowledge or opinions appreciated.
>
> Regards
>
> Beth
>
> ==== AUS-VIC-WESTERN-DISTRICT Mailing List ====
> Ballarat Genealogical Society
> www.ballaratgenealogy.org.au/bgmain.htm
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

This thread: