what a slimey person
 

I hope he gets the max

http://ww2awartobewon.com/wwii-news/...onal-archives/

Re: what a slimey person
 

Agreed. Such activities as Dehays' thefts will ruin our "real" researchers' opportunities to use archive services.

Matti

Re: what a slimey person
 

Theft is common in many situations, sad to say. Regarding World War II research, photographs from one book appear in another, without proper permission and attribution. While doing internet research, anonymous or not so anonymous persons, post photos and other information without permission, Some are honest mistakes, some are not. The equation is: Does the internet hurt or hinder real research? And what about the "private collections" I see mentioned in books by known authors? They do not reside in official archives. Some years ago, a person with great funds was buying up a great number of original Luftwaffe photos. He appears to have disappeared from eBay, and so far as I know, his real identity is unknown.

Respect for the dead, respect for institutions, respect for private property? In my view, the anonymous nature of the internet has helped to justify disrespect as well as theft.


Ed

Re: what a slimey person
 

Ed,

True, but the Internet has also brought answers to some of our questions and has helped identify photographs which would have remained unknown in Pre-Internet days.

Theft from National archives has been going on for decades. There was a famed British researcher who stole thousands of documents, his names escapes me now.

Re: what a slimey person
 

Hi guys

I don't wish to cause a controversy, but when it comes to using photographs in my books I invariably find myself in a quandary.
I'm the first to admit that I don't fully understand copyright laws, that seem to vary from country to country, but perhaps naively I believe that photographs, particularly of a historical nature, should be available for all to see - and use. Surely no one 'owns' them apart from the individual who took the original, and presumably he/she would have wanted to share the image? Surely, the more who see the image in an appropriate setting, the greater appreciation of said image will be possible?

Shoot me down!

Brian

Re: what a slimey person
 

Hi Brian,


Not here to shoot you down but copyright law is complicated and is sometimes ignored or too hard to understand. Some examples:

A) In the US, an old photo album from World War II is sold at an estate sale or ends up in an antique shop. Surely, the original owner doesn't want it, right?

B) A photo album ends up going to a university or veterans group. In the case of veterans, some may have put up photos on a site dedicated to the unit and service they belonged to, and are meant for veterans and relatives to see them like looking back into the past. They may have a statement on the site like "no photographs on this site may be reproduced" or "photographs may be reproduced by contacting us, getting written permission and following certain guidelines."

C) Some photos are passed on to a relative who, for whatever reason, decides to sell them on eBay. Say after the relative has passed on.


These are not all the possibilities.


Take the US Library of Congress:

http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/195_copr.html


Copyright law in Germany for photographs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photog...right_(Germany) Note: For some unknown reason, I can't link to the correct page, so click on the question near the top of the page this link goes to.


Now, this is not all-inclusive and I would contact a lawyer in any case. Some photographs may have indeed been granted copyright protection in some cases, either in writing by the original owner (even long after the war), or by assignment to a publisher who now owns the copyright, or a transfer of ownership to heirs or others.

Take the excellent publication, Luftwaffe im Focus. The owner of a photograph may give limited, one-time reproduction rights but retain ownership of the original photo in his collection.

Permission is the key, along with understanding the copyright laws of various countries.




Hope this helps,
Ed

Re: what a slimey person
 

Thanks, Ed

I'm even more confused now than ever!

Over the years of my publications, the vast majority of pictures I've used have come from veterans etc. On many occasions I have been sent relevant pictures by acquaintances/colleagues/even Forum members, knowing of my imminent work and need for same. I admit that sometimes I have copied from other books (hopefully with due credit) and sometimes from the Internet (and sometimes without credit, not knowing whom to acknowledge).

I trust that I am not one of those 'slimey limeys'!

Cheers
Brian

Re: what a slimey person
 

I agree 110% with you Brian! I knew some people who would visit veterans, make copies from the vets' photo albums, then uses them in books and magazines, and claims copyright! The vets could care less.
I've posted photos given to me by veterans, and eventually, others will use the images. Do I mind? Absolutely not! As far as I am concerned, the photos belong to history. Photographs of a commercial, creative or business nature are different. But WWII photos? No.

I've found old military photos at garage sales, eBay, and collector/gun shows. I will use them. When I am contacted for permission to use, I tell them, "Go ahead and use it! It's not necessary to credit me with the photo. The photographer is unknown."

Re: what a slimey person
 

Luftwaffle8

Many thanks for that

Brian

Re: what a slimey person
 

Can't say I agree with the lack of logic in some posts in this thread.

After someone has spent time and effort chasing up wartime pics, plus their dosh, the new owner can share them (or not) and can expect to be attributed if they do.

Bruce

Re: what a slimey person
 

Care to elaborate, Bruce.

Cheers
Brian

Re: what a slimey person
 

No, think I've made my point.

Re: what a slimey person
 

Hi Bruce

I consider that I have also made my point - we disagree.

Some authors receive expenses to purchase photographs - I never have.

Royalties on WWII aviation books are probably at an all time low. However, I don't write for profit (although its always appreciated), but because I value history. If I am able to share what knowledge I have amassed over many years of research (mainly with no-longer-with-us veterans), then I am content.

Some authors charge a fee for information, others charge for copies of photographs. I have always allowed any photographs from 'my' collection to be used - often without any form of acknowledgement.

History belongs to all - and should be free IMHO!

Brian

Re: what a slimey person
 

This thread has drifted from the point I wanted to make, that, being that anyone who steals from the archives of any nations deserves the maximum penalty, whatever it is.

Re: what a slimey person
 

Hi there!
I don't wish to cause a controversy, but when it comes to using photographs in my books I invariably find myself in a quandary.
I'm the first to admit that I don't fully understand copyright laws, that seem to vary from country to country, but perhaps naively I believe that photographs, particularly of a historical nature, should be available for all to see - and use. Surely no one 'owns' them apart from the individual who took the original, and presumably he/she would have wanted to share the image? Surely, the more who see the image in an appropriate setting, the greater appreciation of said image will be possible?
take photos from here:https://damagedphotorestoration.com/
can find something useful, good luck with your research)

Re: what a slimey person
 

OK noyolo, so what about the person who located the photo in the first place (often incurring considerable expense in travel, correspondence, purchase and ensuing research) and put in all the effort to identify who/what it depicted and to put it into a historical context? If you just take the photo for your own use then you are forcing the original finder to do work on your behalf for no reward. To me that is morally wrong.

Re: what a slimey person
 

When I did my national service in 1995-1996 in the French Army archives (SHA), most of the officers files of the Napoleon era had disappeared, for the reason that they were signed by Napoleon himself and so were sought at by collectioners.

Now, when you go to these archives, security is much more reinforced, but too late for many documents.

My own opinion is that Internet is a huge booster for any historical research, and numerisation of archives is the best way to make them usable to many, especially abroad (and it is always a good thing to check both sides archives for WWII history, when possible), but also to protect them from theft or destruction (by reducing manual handling, or creating a "save" in case of fire).

Sadly French archives is decade late for numerisation. A pity because when I did my service 23 years ago I worked on such a project, but it was a total failure, due to a very bad choice of documents to be scanned: they were larger to the available scan, so we had to scan the four corners, then assemble them into one file, and then we were supposed to run a software on the image that will recognize the text. Sadly it was fully hand written on a dark paper with many vertical and horizontal lines, and the percentage of correct text was close to nil. Actually we were far faster by copying ourselves the text (that was perfectly readable for human eyes). But we had to follow orders and so use the software (and then correct 99% of the result manually). Last to be said, if the documents were in such a good state, it was because "nobody was ever asking to read them", so it was judged OK to take them out the archives to lend them to our service for months. Effectively, nobody ever asked for it in the 8 months I was there.