File:Katharine Hepburn in The Warriors Husband.jpg
From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Size of this preview: 452 × 599 pixels. Other resolutions: 181 × 240 pixels | 544 × 721 pixels.
Original file (544 × 721 pixels, file size: 76 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)
Summary
Photograph of the actress <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Hepburn" class="extiw" title="en:Katharine Hepburn">Katharine Hepburn</a> in the 1932 Broadway production of The Warrior's Husband.
Public domain explanation
- The photograph was taken for publicity purposes, and would have been sent in a press pack to theatrical magazines and the general press for promotion of the play—thus satisfying the demands for "publication".
- The photograph does not appear to contain the copyright symbol ©, the word "Copyright", or the abbreviation "Copr.", as then required for copyright.
- There are other photographs from the same photoshoot which appear to include a stock number and author signature, but that do not appear to contain the copyright symbol ©, the word "Copyright", or the abbreviation "Copr." — see <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh168/AllAboutKate/photos/32/warrior/32warrior-9.jpg">[1]</a> and <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh168/AllAboutKate/photos/32/warrior/32-warrior-4.jpg">[2]</a>. This suggests that none of the publicity images for the play were published with a copyright notice.
- By publishing a photograph without such a notice, under the terms of the 1909 Copyright Act (which was law until 1978) the image went into the public domain.
- If there is any chance that the photograph was copyrighted, under the terms of the 1909 Copyright Act it would have had to be renewed 28 years after publication. A search for copyright renewal records of 1960 (<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/cache/Art-1960JanJun.pdf">[3]</a>, <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/cache/Art-1960JulDec.pdf">[4]</a>) reveal no trace that this occurred.
Licensing
Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
| Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| current | 08:09, 8 January 2017 | | 544 × 721 (76 KB) | 127.0.0.1 (talk) | <p>Photograph of the actress <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine_Hepburn" class="extiw" title="en:Katharine Hepburn">Katharine Hepburn</a> in the 1932 Broadway production of <i>The Warrior's Husband</i>. </p> <h3><span class="mw-headline" id="Public_domain_explanation">Public domain explanation</span></h3> <ul> <li>The photograph was taken for publicity purposes, and would have been sent in a press pack to theatrical magazines and the general press for promotion of the play—thus satisfying the demands for "publication". </li> <li>The photograph does not appear to contain the copyright symbol ©, the word "Copyright", or the abbreviation "Copr.", as then required for copyright.</li> <li>There are other photographs from the same photoshoot which appear to include a stock number and author signature, but that do not appear to contain the copyright symbol ©, the word "Copyright", or the abbreviation "Copr." — see <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh168/AllAboutKate/photos/32/warrior/32warrior-9.jpg">[1]</a> and <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh168/AllAboutKate/photos/32/warrior/32-warrior-4.jpg">[2]</a>. This suggests that none of the publicity images for the play were published with a copyright notice.</li> <li>By publishing a photograph without such a notice, under the terms of the 1909 Copyright Act (which was law until 1978) the image went into the public domain.</li> <li>If there is any chance that the photograph <i>was</i> copyrighted, under the terms of the 1909 Copyright Act it would have had to be renewed 28 years after publication. A search for copyright renewal records of 1960 (<a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/cache/Art-1960JanJun.pdf">[3]</a>, <a rel="nofollow" class="external autonumber" href="http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/cache/Art-1960JulDec.pdf">[4]</a>) reveal no trace that this occurred.</li> </ul> |
- You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
The following 2 pages link to this file:
