copyright query

[Jem2109]

I was going through some postcards my Aunt gave me after my gran died and found a couple of very old photo's among them (they are professional pics in postcard style).

One of them has to be my Great Grandparents as my late grandad is the spitting image of one of the blokes in the photo. The other two are a baby (obvious family resemblance as could be my brother in the photo) and a wedding photo, no idea who these people are but will be emailing family once I have them scanned.

Now my copyright question, obviously I'm chuffed to bits with these photo's and once family find out I have them they will want copies, how can I do this? All the photo's have photographers details on them, one is While U Wait Studios, 165, 187 &117 Wellington Terrace Promenade, Blackpool, and the other two are, S E Taylor Bondgate Darlington and 95 Newgate Street Bishop Auckland. I've done some searching and came across nothing, if the companies no longer exist how does the copyright work? Any ideas?

At a guess I'd say the photo's are from 1915- 1930's if the baby is my grandad and the wedding photo is his parents. Not a clue on the one from Blackpool, how late were the postcard style photo's taken?

I also found the Requiem Mass card for my Nanna's funeral, do you think there would be copyright issues over this?

[Guy Etchells]

Copyright in photographs taken before 1 January 1945 expired 31 December 1994 unless still protected by copyright in another European Economic Area on 1 July 1995. It is therefore highly unlikely the photos would be in copyright.

The RM card would have been copyright of whoever arranged the service but I very much doubt if there would be a problem even if it was still in copyright.
Cheers
Guy

[Jem2109]

Thanks Guy! that's brill.

[Ann.McClean]

May I jump in here - my cousin informs me that he is posting images of various BMD certificates to do with his family onto his website - something I have thought of doing as well

Is this OK, or is there a copyright issue involved?

Grateful for advice as always.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b27/anniemcc/cheers1.gif Ann

[Peter Goodey]

"Is this OK, or is there a copyright issue involved?"


It most certainly is not OK!

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/advice/crown-copyright/copyright-guidance/copying-of-birth-death-and-marriage-certificates-and-marriage-registers.htm

[Guy Etchells]

Not so clear as you seem to think Peter the relevant section is
"b. by individuals or organisations for their own record keeping purposes, provided that the copies are not passed to others as evidence of birth, death or marriage;"

In other words as long as you are not passing the copy off as a genuine certificate it is legal to copy a certificate.

In most cases a scan will not reproduce the background of the certificate making it obvious that it is not an official copy.
Cheers
Guy

[Peter Goodey]

Looks crystal clear to me.


The question was about "images of various BMD certificates" and the OPSI site says copying may be permitted "within works of genealogical research undertaken by or on behalf of the family concerned where the work in question will be given limited distribution only. For the avoidance of doubt, a work will NOT be regarded as being given limited distribution if it is placed on the Internet"

[Guy Etchells]

That is a separate condition, it is an alternative to, not in addition to the condition b.
There are five separate scenarios where copying is allowed the one you mention actually envelopes the possibility of a paid researcher doing the research and providing a copy for the family.
Cheers
Guy

[Peter Goodey]

8 (b) is addressing the situation where, for example, an organisation requires a birth certificate as proof of age and is permitted to retain a copy. In other words, nothing to do with the question.

8 (d) on the other hand is totally relevant to the question which was about works of genealogical research. Note the word 'works'. The paragraph quite unambiguously applies whether or not it was undertaken by a paid researcher.

The solution to Ann's problem is clear - she can simply transcribe the data from the certificate and publish it in whatever way she wishes because "the copyright does not subsist in the information on the certificate".

[Guy Etchells]

Try reading it again Peter it also includes individuals.

Rather more importantly than those guidance notes the law certainly allows some certificates i.e. those free ones published 125 years ago or older and any commercially published (sold) certificates over 50 years old.

As I stated the situation is not as clear as you try to make out.
Cheers
Guy

[Peter Goodey]

"Try reading it again Peter it also includes individuals"

I managed to absorb it the first time I read it. The paragraph is irrelevant to what Ann wants to do. Paragraph 8(d) covers what she wishes to do.

If you're so convinced that you're right, why don't you publish a copy of a certificate on one of your web pages and post the URL here? I'll report it to GRO and we'll see what they have to say about it.

If they say it's acceptable, you'll be proved right and I'll be proved wrong.

[Guy Etchells]

"Try reading it again Peter it also includes individuals"

I managed to absorb it the first time I read it. The paragraph is irrelevant to what Ann wants to do. Paragraph 8(d) covers what she wishes to do.

If you're so convinced that you're right, why don't you publish a copy of a certificate on one of your web pages and post the URL here? I'll report it to GRO and we'll see what they have to say about it.

If they say it's acceptable, you'll be proved right and I'll be proved wrong.

Very well
http://www.framland.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/EBC.htm
Do your worst.
Cheers
Guy

[Ed McKie]

The discussion between Guy and Peter on this subject just illustrates how the concept of copyright when it does not relate to the protection of the rights of an author for the protection of his creative efforts, has got its knickers in a twist. Why on earth does the GRO wish to claim copyright on a Birth certificate for goodness sake. It did not create the work, it is merely the production of a piece of paper containing bits of information, which in themselves are not copyright.

And when it comes to protecting "images" which are in fact a computer generated reproduction of the information contained a machine coded file, well then the mind boggles. In an increasingly daft world, one could imagine Adobe or Microsoft claiming copyright over every "image" created with their software.

Cheers..Ed
Cheers..Ed

[Guy Etchells]

The view is held (according to the consultation document) that by claiming copyright on birth, marriage and death certificates this will help to prevent identity theft.
However that argument falls down at the very first hurdle as under UK law anyone in the world may buy any official copy of any birth, marriage or death certificate ever issued in the UK (with the exception of certificates for stillbirths and adopted persons).
see also section 5.11 and 6.1
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/advice/crown-copyright/future-management-of-crown-copyright.pdf

Here they are usinmessage=The view is held (according to the consultation document) that by claiming copyright on birth, marriage and death certificates this will help to prevent identity theft.
However that argument falls down at the very first hurdle as under UK law anyone in the world may buy any official copy of any birth, marriage or death certificate ever issued in the UK (with the exception of certificates for stillbirths and adopted persons).
see also section 5.11 and 6.1
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/advice/crown-copyright/future-management-of-crown-copyright.pdf

Here they are using the same excuse as they use with the 1911 census, however to use it for publically accessible birth, marriage and death certificates is totally imbecilic.

In reality it is simply a money making exercise and as such has time restraints.

[Ed McKie]

The view is held (according to the consultation document) that by claiming copyright on birth, marriage and death certificates this will help to prevent identity theft.
However that argument falls down at the very first hurdle.

I rest my case m'lud.

If the reasons given are patently nonsense, then it follows that they are not the true reasons, unless of course you are a government department that doesnt care about making nonsensical claims. Oh dear.. we are talking about a Government department arnt we ? So perhaps they really believe the silly reason !! Nah- no one could be that daft could they :-)

Cheers..Ed

[HelenVSmith]

Hi

Please correct me if I am wrong (as I often am) but the GRO only has the "power" to be unhappy about me posting the image of a certificate to a website. Am I at liberty to post the data?

Regards
Helen

[Guy Etchells]

I can see this turning into another long discussion. ;)

Yes you may transcribe the data to a web site.

Before anyone pipes up about privacy and the data Protection Act (DPA) here is the view of the Information Commissioner (the person empowered to bring enforcement and prosecutions under the DPA.

"In accordance with section 36, if the research in question is undertaken
purely for "that individual's personal, family or household affairs
(including recreational purposes)" then that processing is exempt from
compliance with the Act. Thismessage=I can see this turning into another long discussion. ;)

Yes you may transcribe the data to a web site.

Before anyone pipes up about privacy and the data Protection Act (DPA) here is the view of the Information Commissioner (the person empowered to bring enforcement and prosecutions under the DPA.

"In accordance with section 36, if the research in question is undertaken
purely for "that individual's personal, family or household affairs
(including recreational purposes)" then that processing is exempt from
compliance with the Act. This would be case the case whether or not that
data was published on a website."

Note in this case only individuals have the exemption to publish details of living persons on a web site. A family history society could not publish such details on their web site.
Cheers
Guy

[HelenVSmith]

Hi

Thank you. I was not planning on putting details about living people and will probably do cutoffs for marriages in around 1945 and cutoff for actual births 1930s.

A second question please. Wills post-1858, are you arware of what the copyright issue is of putting a transcription on the web? I have seen Probate calender info and pre-1858 wills transcribed but very few post 1858.

I am in the process of considering setting up pages for my One Name study of Quested and I have all the post-1858 wills to the end of WW2.

Regards
helen

[Guy Etchells]

Wills are the copyright of the deceased and as such form part of his/her estate.
Cheers
Guy

[lockeroots]

I can explain a bit about USA laws regarding vital records.

Marriage and death records are now and always have been Public Record, they are available to anyone for the asking. With that said, some States have now tried to restrict some access to death records by asking that you state your relationship along with a photo ID of yourself to help prove your kinship to someone who has died with in the last 75 years.

That new restriction seems to go against the Public Records laws and I believe could be challenged if a State or County or City refused you access to a copy of a Marriage or Death record. Federal over rules some State and local laws on some respects. I believe some of the newest laws some States have put in place, are in responce to the ever growing identity theft problem.
But I belive if a State or local level were to refuse me access to a record,
I would simply file a Freedom of Information Act complaint and eventually I would get access to that record regardless of my kinship to the people in the records I was seeking.

I should not now or ever have to provide a photo ID to be able to obtain a Public Record here in the USA. That seems to go against our Freedom of Privacy Act.

Birth records prior to a certain date, which I think is 100 years and as long as that person is now deceased can be obtained.

So far of all the Lock(e) records I have ordered via snail mail through the many various court houses or vital records offices at the state level, not once have I been denied in obtaining a copy of a record that I requested.
Not once have I provided a photo ID even when they stated I MUST provide them with it. But in time I do expect at some point to be denied and when that happens, they will find out that they aren't messing around with a noobie, they will be dealing with someone who happens to know some what about the USA laws :)

I have heard stories of court houses refusing access to public records, stating no one has the right to view or make copies of such records.
A simple phone call to our local congressman will normally get a phone call to that court house to YELL that his citizens in his or her district are being denied access to public records. Believe me, when a congressman is forced to make such a phone call, heads will roll !

I myself have run in to one such court house whom does not allow for any public records to be accessed. The court house made an agreement with the local historical society to microfilm all the public records, and now can only be searched and copied only at the local historical society.
Microfilms as most of you know are not good quality images and make poor copies of. When I demanded access to the local Public Records, I was threatened with jail time!
Icords I have ordered via snail mail through the many various court houses or vital records offices at the state level, not once have I been denied in obtaining a copy of a record that I requested.
Not once have I provided a photo ID even when they stated I MUST provide them with it. But in time I do expect at some point to be denied and when that happens, they will find out that they aren't messing around with a noobie, they will be dealing with someone who happens to know some what about the USA laws :)

We will see how this turns out. If the County and State still refuse to make the public records available to the public, I will then take it to the federal level. States hate it when the Feds get involved! :)

Don

[Ed McKie]

Now this thread has been resurrected, Guy did you ever hear from the GRO about
your certificate posting ?

Cheers..Ed