I have to disagree on some
The Taschen books are in no way a substitute for the originals - the original year books as you will be aware (having owned a set) contain more images than the Taschen versions, I have many of the original magazines & bound 'Studio Magazine' volumes.
As to adverts I agree they do repeat, but I would not post these - their obvious interest is that they often give an importer name and address for glass manufacturers and designers - see Stennett-Willson topic above.
As to encouraging others to break copyright, I don't believe I am - but I have edited out any suggestion that people should collect or post images of these year books on this thread
- I hope that is understood and also that no one should post any Taschen images â€” just in case - all my images are taken from an original 1950s publication.
The original publisher of this year book and the images posted was 'The Studio Publications: London & New York' - I checked this publisher out and it did indeed fold in the 1980s - all images fell into the public domain after 25 years - they have never been picked up or bought by Taschen, they would have to buy Studio Publications to own the back catalogue and that has and never will happen.
Taschen publish so cheaply because they use such free images - Studio publication images from this period on are used freely by many modern magazines and pattern books like Dover publications - the tag is not courtesy of Studio Publications/Taschen but in the bibliography as taken from The Studio ....'
I have done my home work on this as you always suggest Nigel
I have many magazines - such as 'The Magazine of Art' & 'The Artist' 1890s - 1950s with wonderful articles running to many pages on glass, I think it unfair not to be able to share these with GMB members.
I am very involved with copyright law, I am a designer and work with furniture/carpet/lighting companies who keep me constantly updated on the laws within Europe and Worldwide.
But to keep the peace, this is simply a post with some very interesting pictures I hope people will enjoy
I would ask that the committee don't pull this thread in light of my alterations and explanation here.
As always I bow to your wisdom and experience Nigel - even when we disagree on things, and those are very few
I emailed Taschen about this years ago, but have sent another email today in case situation has changed (slim chance, but ....)
I would also like to put it that not being able to share Taschen images (which are not as good or big as the originals - IMHO original plates are best), then the year books images being in the public domain are an excellent substitute - if that is all they are then so be it.