Hi Pat M.... I would be very interested in these comments as we have had a major disagreement on this issue on a private website I have. My understanding of the law is that if credit is given to the person who copyrighted the information and 10 or less copies are posted, the information may be used. **** I have seen NO such rule, and if you have a citation of authority, I would appreciate it. As a matter of discussion, "10 copies posted or presented where" would be the first question posed by any court? **** Truly, I do not believe this is or could be the state of the law. To illustrate, suppose I posted one copy on my website, gave one of the 10 to the newspaper, another to be read at a seminar or family reunion, another to a stranger for 50 cents, another to the library, another to a local genealogical society, and still another to a teacher for his classes ??????? By any of those actions of mine, though less than 10 copies were distributed, it is obvious, it would seem, that I have violated virtually every right held by the author of those works. The restriction being that you can not include in published material without express written permission from the author of the work or the one who copyrighted it. *****That is surely the law, and such permission surely should be in writing and witnessed in order that the person using that material may be completely safe; verbal permission sure would not suffice. One of my nephews pointed out another provision to the copyright law that I did not know, that if it is for teaching or instruction purposes, copyrighted material may be used. **** In my article you will find the rules as to teaching, explanation and critique, as set out by the U.S. Code. In those instances if no remuneration is gained or intended, and the use truly is for education only, then such usage likely is permitted. For a public website, I believe the parameters are different. Please correct me if I am wrong. Because of this disagreement, we have taken off a ll pictures and other things that are not owned by the family or that we have copies of. Thank you. Pat M.... **** This is a very difficult area of the law; how did you gain the photos? were such knowingly given or sold to you such that you now are the owner and not merely a custodian? did the actual ex-owner copyright the materials of which you speak? Did you gain those from a library, museum, or archives that is open to the public? Then too, notice that the mere fact that you are a descendant or relative of the person portrayed does not give you any rights as against the owner of that memento or photo (we can copyright such materials no matter the degree of kinship if any. Hope this might contribute to your concern. Again, I do not know how any court will act in future matters of intellectual property placed on the net, and I welcome the comments of those who work with the current copyright law. Cordially Paul

Paul, and all, I'm not clear on who the parties were to this conversation (below), but I am concerned that this could be abused. > One of my nephews pointed out another provision to the copyright law that I did not know, that if it is for teaching or instruction purposes, copyrighted material may be used. **** In my article you will find the rules as to teaching, explanation and critique, as set out by the U.S. Code. In those instances if no remuneration is gained or intended, and the use truly is for education only, then such usage likely is permitted.< Quoting FindLaw for the "fair use provision" as of 01/06/03: "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include - (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors." I spent a number of years managing training and education programs for a government agency. I frequently had instructors, and/or developers of lesson plans, who had a belief that they could copy virtually *anything* for educational use -- including booklets, games, workbooks, etc. It took many "how to" classes, and much doing to stop that practice, there, but this helped: From HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/17/chapters/1/sections/section_107_notes.html "reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson;" There is a world of difference between making copies of sentence examples from Patricia Law Hatcher's *Producing a Quality Family History*, and making ten copies (or any number) of the entire book, rather than purchasing it for your class on "So, you want to publish. . . " It is not likely in the first instance that there is much copyright concern. Copying the entire book, though, even for a "non-profit", "educational endeavor", "one time use" certainly could cause copyright concerns. It would if I were the author. Oh, by the way, the use of the quotations here from FindLaw, is an illustration of "fair use" -- I think. Pat (in Tucson) ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx