Topic: Scandinavian or Murano?

[MarkHill]

I should also say many thanks to Graham for forwarding this scan on to me and validating my memory!

[Frank]

I am not certain but suspect that image is copyright and educational uses expressly forbids public posting. In any case its full source should be stated.

[MarkHill]

Hello Frank,
Please delete it then as Moderator.
If you can't and are sure that it falls under copyright which expressly forbids it from being posted online, then I will. Note that I have credited it as 'Scan from Czechoslovak Glass Review'.
Graham and I have been photocopying CGR under the guidance of, and with the permission of, the librarians at the V&A and British Library, although I understand that this is allowed only for private use, rather than for later publishing. I'm not using any of these images in my catalogue.
All I was trying to do was let Wes know what he had.
So Wes, if you haven't already, have a quick look before it vanishes!
Apologies if any copyright problems have been caused, none were intended.
Mark

(In this instance, if this is the case, the copyright note below as regards images does not apply!)

[Anne]

Hi Mark, Frank's not able to delete as he's not currently a moderator  (I think we wore him out so he's taking time off! ) but Cathy B, Max, Javier, Marcus or I can amend images and posts for you.

The difference in using the images on the board or the gallery is that this is classed as publishing as we are a public forum and gallery so we fall outside the private use and educational guidelines. Copyright material can be posted onto the board or the gallery only if the permission of the copyright holder is obtained and quoted in the post, and a full citation/credit given.

Hope this helps. 

[MarkHill]

Hi Anne,
Thanks for the swift reply. Sorry, I didn't realise that Frank wasn't a Moderator, thus was unable to do that.
It has now been deleted (sighs of relief all around).
Wesley, please contact me should you wish to see it as it does confirm that the design was by LĂ­pa. I presume that I am able to send a scan or photocopy of a photocopy to him as this is on a private basis.
Thanks,
Mark

[Anne]

Hi Mark what is done privately between consenting adults does not impact the board or gallery.
Thanks for deleting the pic from the gallery.

[MarkHill]

no probs Anne!
Blimey, you stay awake late looking at this too!
Best,
Mark

[yelooc]

Hi Anne,

There are scans from the same publication in a gallery called 'lecasson'. What's the difference?

Graham

[johnphilip]

Hi i viewed the auction and had a good look at that piece it was extremely heavy and i could see no wear at all and a friend who was a gaffer and worked in glass thirty years felt the same so we didnt bid.mind you niether of us has perfect eyesight.

[Frank]

Hi Anne,

There are scans from the same publication in a gallery called 'lecasson'. What's the difference?

Graham

I see adverts which are out of copyright, by convention unless a photographer is mentioned under an image, and in another case I see the annotation "Image copyright Glass Review fom 30 1975-8 p23, and used in compliance with copyright terms." Photos ascribed to a particular photographer are subject to photographic copyright of the individual and not the publisher.

Czech copyright law is relevant to CGR and respected internationally under the Berne convention. UK copyright law does not apply. Consent to use CGR editorial needs to be cleared with the Czech publishers as they still exist there are no difficulties other than language in talking to them. An explicit message about copyright appears in each issue.

Changes to International copyright law in the last ten years do not over-ride the copyright in force at the time of publication, in many but not all cases. It is the responsibility of a publisher to ensure that copyright is complied with or us poor researchers will be the victims. On a public board the publisher is the poster and to a lesser extent the owner of the facility has a responsibility that can be demonstrated by how their terms and conditions but also by them removing material that is not clear in how copyright permission is addressed.

The detail is complex and none of the above should be construed as more than my opinion based on my legal counsellors advice.

So quite a big difference.