I believe that this is might be the case for many images, the site also
lists their local LAM partners for the 50th anniversary (which is next
year).  Might be possible to get logo rights, or possible even some nifty
retro-future image from their collections

Simon

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 4:03 PM, BRIAN TINGLE <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> these guys might own the copyright
> http://seattlecenter.org/
>
> https://www.facebook.com/pages/1962-Seattle-Worlds-Fair/106938462090
>
> On Dec 9, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Doran, Michael D wrote:
>
> > Hi Trish,
> >
> > Thank you for the referral.  I looked through that but I don't think my
> intended use (an unofficial code4lib conference t-shirt) can be categorized
> as teaching, research, or study. ;-)  I may do a one-off copy for myself.
> >
> > -- Michael
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> >> Trish Rose-Sandler
> >> Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 1:56 PM
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] copyright/fair use considerations for re-using
> >> Seattle World's Fair images
> >>
> >> Michael,
> >>
> >> If you think your use falls under Fair Use you may find the recently
> >> released document from the Visual Resources Association useful
> >>
> >> *Statement on the Fair Use of Images for Teaching, Research, and
> Study*. *
> >> http://www.vraweb.org/organization/pdf/VRAFairUseGuidelinesFinal.pdf*.
> >>
> >> Trish Rose-Sandler
> >> Data Analyst, Biodiversity Heritage Library Project
> >> http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Beanworks <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think what Cary is trying to say is "welcome to the fun world of
> >>> copyright!"
> >>>
> >>> No, you shouldn't assume copyright was not renewed. You will need to
> >>> determine (1) who the copyright holder is/was and (2) whether the
> >> copyright
> >>> has lapsed. This is not always an easy task, which is why you need to
> >>> document your good faith efforts (which will, of course, be
> exhaustive).
> >>>
> >>> Carol
> >>>
> >>> On Dec 9, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Cary Gordon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Copyright law requires that you make a good-faith effort to find the
> >>>> copyright owners. If you document such effort and they sue you, this
> >>>> can weigh heavily in your favor. There are two obvious caveats: a) You
> >>>> can still get sued, not to mention annoying cease-and-desist letters;
> >>>> and 2) They could still win.
> >>>>
> >>>> Being that we are, for the most part, not art critics, you could
> >>>> consider creating original art. You might get mocked, particularly
> >>>> after a few beers, but that's just the way we roll. Of course, if you
> >>>> buy beer, that will reduce any mock risk.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cary
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Doran, Michael D <[log in to unmask]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> I was hoping to re-use/re-purpose a couple of 1962 Seattle World's
> >> Fair
> >>> images found on the interwebs [1][2].  Both images were originally
> >> created
> >>> for souvenir decals.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> According to the U.S. Copyright Office's "Copyrights Basics" [3]
> >>> section on works originally created and published or registered before
> >>> January 1, 1978, "copyright endured for a first term of 28 years from
> the
> >>> date it was secured" -- i.e. for these images, from 1962 to 1990.  It
> >> goes
> >>> on to say that "During the last (28th) year of the first term, the
> >>> copyright was eligible for renewal."  This however, was *not* an
> >> automatic
> >>> renewal.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, unless the copyright was explicitly renewed in 1990, the images
> >> are
> >>> in the public domain.  Since these images were for souvenir decals
> >> (rather
> >>> than something like a poster), I'm inclined to think the original
> >> copyright
> >>> owner probably didn't renew the copyright.  However, I don't know who
> the
> >>> original copyright owner is and really have no way of finding out, and
> >>> therefore I can't ascertain whether or not the copyright was renewed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For those with more experience in copyright, any thoughts regarding
> >>> situations like this?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I realize this isn't a coding question, but figured I might get some
> >>> helpful responses from those of y'all working in archives and various
> >>> digital projects where copyright issues regularly come up.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ps  I've eliminated the "Century 21 Exposition" logo in my proposed
> >>> reuse, if that matters (on one image, there is a registered trademark
> >>> symbol next to the logo).  I'm also not retaining the original "Seattle
> >>> World's Fair" text.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Michael
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] http://www.flickr.com/photos/hollywoodplace/6007390480/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [2]
> >>>
> >>
> http://media.photobucket.com/image/seattle%20world%2527s%20fair%20monorail/
> >> bananaphone5000/NEWGORILLA/SeattleWFDecal.jpg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [3] http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf
> >>>>>
> >>>>> # Michael Doran, Systems Librarian
> >>>>> # University of Texas at Arlington
> >>>>> # 817-272-5326 office
> >>>>> # 817-688-1926 mobile
> >>>>> # [log in to unmask]
> >>>>> # http://rocky.uta.edu/doran/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Cary Gordon
> >>>> The Cherry Hill Company
> >>>> http://chillco.com
> >>>
>