I have an ethical question. I sell a lot of coins, mostly on eBay, and I keep all the old photographs of the coins that I've sold, although I no longer have a record of who bought it. In another thread today I posted this photo of a coin of Constantine I: My question: are there any ethical concerns about posting photos of coins I no longer own? I'm not trying to deceive anyone, but is it possible that the current owner of this coin might object to having this photo posted? Since I don't know who the current owner is, do you think it is rude or inconsiderate to post a photo like this?
If the coin was unpublished, and you sold it to someone who intended to publish it, it would ruin their fun if you revealed it first. For ordinary coins, the more appearances the better. Three more buyers down the chain, someone will be tracing provenance and be excited to learn they own a ex-gsimonel.
I kind of agree with this. I purchased a coin of Valerian I a while back and posted pictures here. @David@PCC then posted a picture of the same coin that he had sold to someone else back in 2016. The buyer of his coin was not the seller of my coin so it was cool to see that it had travelled through several collectors' hands before reaching me.
It would be terribly expensive to post any numismatic research if one had to own all the coins you were researching. One can hardly call an auction photo a work of art which copyright should be protected.
As far as ethics go, I think we are something of temporary curators of these pieces. They exist for everyone’s edification and enjoyment. I once saw one of my coin photos used in a random thread here on CT. It made me feel something of a source of pride, really. You didn’t ask about legal and the legality is not something that I could speak to. As far as ethically, I find it a crime to not share photos of these wonderful markers of history.
In Germany they are protected by copyright! And there is no "fair use" for academic institutions over here. I know of one dealer of modern coins who persues any person using photos from his shop without approbation and in part lives on costly warnings. I think he never lost a case.
I agree that if you post a photo taken by someone else you should credit the source. In this case, though, I took the photo but no longer own the coin.
The copyright of the photo belongs to the person who took it. It doesn't matter if you sold the coin 5 years ago. As long as you took the picture, you can do whatever you want with the image. We all use auction pictures freely, but in reality, the photos belong to the auction houses. So, if you decide to use a photo in a book or paper, you need to ask permission from CNG, Heritage, etc. They are mostly cool with it as long as you give them credit...
While the coin is no longer yours, the photograph of the coin you sold is not the work of the current owner of the coin. I'm quite sure that anyone else's claim to the exclusive use of that photograph, once published by its creator, is indefensible. It becomes a different situation if you copyrighted the photo at or before first publication, and then assigned copyright to the new owner. A great example of this is the avatar to the left, which is the photo on my website. I staged the content, hired another photographer to do the shooting, and compensated him to assign the copyright to me. I have successfully defended exclusive use of that photo every time someone else has attempted to use it.
In my album of ancient coins I include a photo of my coin along with a description and a photo of the coin I used as a reference. Most of the reference photos are from Wildwinds. I asked Dane and she said it was OK. I don't use them for any commercial effort, only for whoever gets my collection someday.
A great move, getting permission to use the photos before doing so. There are plenty who would not be so considerate.
The picture belongs to the individual who shot it The coin belongs to the individual who bought it They don't have to be the same : When I post a seller's picture of a coin I own I give credit When I post a picture I shot myself of a coin I no longer own I mention it, kind of "not mine anymore" or something of the like Q
gsimonel, I have no problem posting photos of coins I've sold in the past & will ID them as Ex Al Kowsky Collection, like the coin pictured below. Many of my coin photos have been used by other people & many can be seen on the internet in places like Wind Winds, without giving credit to me. I feel flattered when other people use my photos, with or without acknowledge .
As a rule I do not post sold coins, though on two occasions out of close to 1500 posts I have done so. It was because I needed to make a specific point that could only be illustrated by using those coins. The same is true for coins I do not own which again I am in violation of that rule once (I think) One of the reasons that I tend to be rather reticent doing so is that I know that some of the coins I have sold are currently in the hands of other CT ers and I do think it would be rather bad form to use their coins. However at any time that I feel compelled to use a coin that is not currently in my possession I usually will place a disclaimer " This is not/no longer my coin" As an illustration This is a stater of Koson I sold a few months ago in a CNG E Auction This is violation no three Photo by W. Hansen This is NO LONGER my coin
I disagree. I believe it is impossible for an American to have copyright on most ancient coin images. The photographer may have "moral rights", but nothing that can be enforced by law. (I realize my opinion is controversial most legal scholars agree.). I have no qualms about using ordinary photos in my own works, and no fear of losing a lawsuit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.
The REAL question is: if a MONKEY takes a picture of one of your coin, should the macaque be assigned the copyright ?????????????? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute
@Ed Snible that case seems to hinge on the term "exact photographic copies" since "exact" precludes the originality that would support copyright. Given the myriad of expert opinions on lighting techniques when photographing ancients, it seems there is a creative element involved, and the notion of "exact copy" doesn't apply. I'm not sure how copyright applies to photos of 3-D objects like sculptures, but that would seem a better comparison.
this is not really in response to Glenn's original question about using his pictures of coins he no longer owns; but is instead on copyright and fair use-- 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use41 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. https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
Yes. It's your image absolutely 100%. I have an idea. Why not now also sell the image to the person who bought the coin from you. $10 say. And if he doesn't want to pay, threaten to sue the new owner of your ex-coin if he ever uses your image online. This brings you in line with what many German dealers do. I don't really think you shd do this but it does reinforce the point that the image you took is absolutely 100% yours and the buyer of the coin has no right to use it. The ethical problem lies with the buyer of the coin (not to use your image, or to get your permission or even buy the image). There's zero ethical issues on your side. Indicentally my own coin images on Flickr are almost without exception Creative Commons Attribute Non Commercial In other words anyone can use any of the thousands of images Ive uploaded on Flickr, for any non commercial use as long as they atrribute me. You dont even need to ask my permission or notify me but you shd add "image, Andrew McCabe on Flickr" or similar