Re: Copyright term for photographs

From: Bernard Katz <bkatz[_at_]uoguelph.ca>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 18:51:15 -0400 ()

On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Amalyah Keshet <akeshet[_at_]imj.org.il> wrote:
>
> The term of copyright for photographs sometimes differs from that
> of other works of art, and I am trying to determine why. For example,
> under the present Israeli copyright law (essentially the British
> copyright law of 1911, a left-over from the Mandate period),
> photographs enjoy copyright for 50 years from the creation of the
> negative. I understand that this is the base term for photographs
> according to the Berne convention as well. Am I correct in believing
> that in the US, the term for photographs is the same as that for other
> works of art (70 years from death of author/artist)? What is the term
> under present UK law? Other European countries?
>
> Does anyone know *why* the term for photographs differs?
>
> Many thanks in advance for any enlightenment.

In Canada, the term for photographs recently changed (came into force on Jan.1, 1999). It is now life of the "author" (defined as the owner of the original "negative or other plate" at the time it was made) + 50 years -- *if* the negative was owned by a 'real' person. Previously, the term was 50 years from the date of creation of the original base negative. The latter is *still* true for a corporately owned image, unless "the majority of the voting shares of [that corporation] are owned by a natural person who would have qualified as the author of the photograph except for sub-section (2) [which requires that a real person own the negative in order to be called its "author"], [in which case] the term of copyright is the term set out in section 6 [ie. life+50]" (Sect.10(1.1)). There had been significant lobbying from photographers for these changes (Lord save us).

My take on the reasons for the creation + 50 years scenario is simply that it is hard enough to trace death dates for authors of written works, and it was just an attempt to make life a little easier by setting the term of protection at creation + 50. That way, a publication date (if one exists) or internal evidence in the photo could establish an outside limit as to when the photograph had been taken. But the photographers were quite upset by having their works deemed not worthy of the longer protection.

Cheers,

Bernard Katz, Head, Special Collections and Library Development
McLaughlin Library, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON  Canada  N1G 2W1
         and Chair, Ontario Library Association Copyright Task Force

e-m: bkatz[_at_]uoguelph.ca // v: 519-824-4120, ext.2089 // fax: 519-824-6931 Received on Thu Aug 12 1999 - 22:53:54 GMT