A kind of legal question about photos.

[Dominik]

I have one legal question. I was informed that all photos taken in the UK before 1957 are public domain. What does it exactly mean? If I buy a photo from, let's say, the RAF Museum can I use it freely in the article or book with the captions of the source of the photo, e.g. Hurricanes over London (RAF Museum).
I'm not a lawer and I don't want to break any laws and rules.

Thank you in advance for any help.

Dominik

[John Beaman]

I am sure there will be further commentary about this from our UK friends, but, in the USA, "public domain" means it is not copyrighted and you can use it as you please. On the other side, if you use it in a copyrighted publication, only THAT reproduction, in your book is copyrighted, not the photo itself. I.e., I could not copy it from your book, put that in my book, and claim a copyright in my book, but if I had my own original reproduction print, I can use it in my book.

[Chris Goss]

If I am not much mistaken, buying a photo from the RAF Museum for ones personal use is one thing but then publishing same photo in a journal would incur an additional fee. Same with IWM hence the 'Not to be reproduced without permission' stamp on the reverse

[Dominik]

Chris and John

Thank you for replies.
I must say that my understanding of "public domain" is rather American. When I have my own copy of a document or photo I can use it freely as long as there's no copyright. That's why I'm a bit surprised and confused by British law. At least now I know what to do or what not to do.

Cheers!

[John Beaman]

Originally Posted by Chris Goss

If I am not much mistaken, buying a photo from the RAF Museum for ones personal use is one thing but then publishing same photo in a journal would incur an additional fee. Same with IWM hence the 'Not to be reproduced without permission' stamp on the reverse

Chris, I will cheerfully admit that British copyright laws are unknown to me, but, if something is labeled as "public domain", that's what it is under international copyright convention rules, and the RAF Museum cannot charge a fee or whatever for reproduction by just putting a stamp on the back of the photo? Public Domain is Public Domain.

In a collorary I have often wondered how the BA in Germany can get away with charging copyright fees for photos taken by the WWII regime, when the Allies ruled that all photos' copyrights were invalid because it was a "criminal regime" as ruled by the Nuremburg Trials. Am I mistaken here?

[Dominik]

Today I have found a few minutes to read about public domain and what I have found is that there should not be any extra fees, as John mentioned.

[Chris Goss]

All I will say is tread very carefully. I have seen original photos given to me by Former German aircrew which I have published in my books appear on websites without my permission. When I have asked where the photos have come from & stated where my photos came from, they have mysteriously disappeared from the website.

[Dominik]

Chris the example you have given is something else. I assume the photos were taken directly from your book which is copyrighted.
But if I buy a photo from any source and the photo belongs to public domain I do not have to pay extra fees for publishing. But if someone who owns the photo shares it with me it clear for me that I should ask for permission (I always do that). If I were them I would have asked you first and then publish on the website.
Returning to main topic. IMHO museums shouldn't take extra fees for the right to publish materials from the Second World War as it's a public domain. In Australia it works like that and in the States too. So why is the difference?

[Graham Boak]

Photos from WW2 are not automatically public domain. As I understand it, all official German state photos are, and all US government photos are, but that isn't true for the UK or other nations, or for photographs taken by private individuals.

[Dominik]

Isn't that true that photos taken before 1957 are treated in the United Kingdom as a Public Domain?