Coin image copyrights

[numisport]

I'm getting started on my own images. However if I buy a coin from a dealer who has imaged my coin, and I now own the coin can I show the image publically ? Does the dealer still own that image or do I now own it along with the coin ?

[rmpsrpms]

The dealer owns the image and you need to get permission to use it (in general). There are certain situations where you can use the image (any image) without permission but generally it's best to get permission.

[coinman_23885]

The person who imaged the coin has copyright to the images unless contractually agreed otherwise.

[#]

I just had bluv62vette aka Todd image 10 coins for me and I asked the same questions. He said I could use them NGC, PCGS, eBay etc. but if I was going to publish something talk to him first. I don't not know for sure but got the feeling he'd just want acknowledgement for his works. Doesn't really concern me as they are just for my enjoyment and I guess insurance proposes if needed.

[numisport]

Thanks for the info. I was considering posting a few coins on this forum but the best images are not mine. In time I think my images can improve.

[coinman_23885]

Collectors and dealers here routinely share images like this with impunity, and to be honest, I wouldn't worry about doing so from a moral perspective (and I address the law in the second paragraph). I do not see anything immoral as you are not attempting to sell the images or use them to gain a profit, but rather, you are attempting to share images of something you purchased. I also do not think the photos have any real economic value; thus, I do not see harm to any person who actually took the photos. Posting on an internet chat room for educational purposes and hobby enjoyment is very different than actually profiting from someone else's intellectual property; it isn't like you are selling posters with the image or using it in a book for commercial distribution.

 

I also feel the need to address the law as I think this thread could scare a number of posters who have posted such images in the past. Nothing in this post should be construed as legal advice, but I think the photographer would likely be without any real remedy at law against you. Unless the copyright is properly registered (which is unlikely given the fees involved), the ability to do anything is severely limited because the attorney's fees and statutory fees are not available. This means that to receive a monetary award, the copyright holder must prove profit or actual damages. As stated, these are inconsequential if they exist at all. And I also do not think the images fall within the purview of the criminal statute which speaks to infringement for commercial advantage or private financial gain or widespread distribution of works intended for commercial distribution. This seems inapposite to the situation at hand.

 

Bottom line: It is always nice and proper to ask first, but for those who have done so in the past, I wouldn't worry about it at all.

[coinman_23885]

I just had bluv62vette aka Todd image 10 coins for me and I asked the same questions. He said I could use them NGC, PCGS, eBay etc. but if I was going to publish something talk to him first. I don't not know for sure but got the feeling he'd just want acknowledgement for his works. Doesn't really concern me as they are just for my enjoyment and I guess insurance proposes if needed.

 

And this is fair. Another well known photographer has done the same for me, and when I indicated the possibility of using the images in a book, the photographer only wanted to be credited as the photographer.

[numisport]

Thanks for the advice coinman. You really laid that legal stuff straight out in a way that I can understand.

[RWB]

Copyright is automatic upon creation. Registration of copyright is nice, but not required under current law. Still .... practicality is mentioned by coinman for good reasons.

[coinman_23885]

Copyright is automatic upon creation. Registration of copyright is nice, but not required under current law.

 

Absolutely, and I hope my post didn't come off as suggesting otherwise. My comments were aimed at remedies and recovery rather than the validity of the copyright itself.

[RWB]

OK. Understood. The phrase "Unless the copyright is properly registered (which is unlikely given the fees involved)..." caught me off-guard.

 

BTW - for those who want to register their original work with the Copyright Office, you receive a nice double-sided certificate suitable for framing. (Older certificates also had an embossed gold-colored seal. But that nicety is long gone. You can always frame the certificate and add a diagonal colored ribbon like on diplomas....)

[Hard Times]

OK. Understood. The phrase "Unless the copyright is properly registered (which is unlikely given the fees involved)..." caught me off-guard.

 

BTW - for those who want to register their original work with the Copyright Office, you receive a nice double-sided certificate suitable for framing. (Older certificates also had an embossed gold-colored seal. But that nicety is long gone. You can always frame the certificate and add a diagonal colored ribbon like on diplomas....)

 

The ones that are strong for the copyright - do they get a green bean?

 

Best, HT

[RWB]

HT - you must add your own bean -- color of your choice.

 

(Having a certificate might also be helpful if you are planning to sell or transfer by bequest the creative work to someone else.)

[bstrauss3]

I prefer Jelly Belly Sour Apple

[James_OldeTowne]

I have a followup question. If I take a copyrighted image and "alter" it for use as artwork (for example, colorize it, distort it, make a jigsaw out of it, etc.) such that it cannot be recognized as being derived from the original work, who owns the copyright on the new image?

[Kurtdog]

I have a followup question. If I take a copyrighted image and "alter" it for use as artwork (for example, colorize it, distort it, make a jigsaw out of it, etc.) such that it cannot be recognized as being derived from the original work, who owns the copyright on the new image?

You do if it's not considered a "derivative work." Those are your Google search words, your legal issue, for the statutory and case law on that.