Scans of personal Magazine collections

personal magazines, copyright and the web

[erobs]

I have a website about a personal hobby of mine and I have collected a large variety magazines covering this topic over the years. Some of the magazines date back into the 60's or prior.

A few years back I started scanning and archiving certain reports out of the magazines for collection on my computer and now I would like to add some of these to my website to document how the event was reported or advertised in the past. I obviously do not own the copyright to these items, if there is still coverage at all these years later, but do own the original magazine.

Can I get some opinion's of if this is a violation of copyright to post these scanned images on the web.

[axgrindr]

if there is still coverage at all these years later, but do own the original magazine.

I think you still have a some time to wait before the material you are wanting to post has fallen out of the original copyright. Probably won't happen in your lifetime.

• For works created after January 1, 1978, copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. In the case of a joint work, copyright lasts for 70 years after the last surviving author's death. For anonymous and pseudonymous works and works made for hire, copyright lasts 95 years from the year of first publication or 120 years from the year of creation, whichever ends first.

• For pre-1978 works still in their original or renewal term of copyright, copyright is extended to 95 years from the date that copyright was originally secured.

Unless you yourself created the content you really do not have the right post it on the internet without permission from the people who did create the content.
Buying a magazine gives you no rights to the content except to read it and maybe use it for educational or fair use purposes.

[ken_b]

I'm no lawyer, so this is just my opinion.

IF you post a scan of an ad or poster to illustrate how an event was advertized AND comment on the way the ads were used, who they were aimed at, etc you might be safe.

With an article, I doubt you could put the whole thing online without getting permission. But you probably could excerpt a few lines here and there for the purposes of critique or illustration of your point.

Best to get actual legal advice to be safe.

[tedster]

There's no doubt these items are still protected under US copyright law. As I read your question, you need to have some sense of whether your intended use falls under what the law calls "Fair Use". Rather than hearing me opine, here are some references you may find helpful:

[chillingeffects.org...]
[copyright.gov...]

[erobs]

Thank you all for your opinions. Also, thank you Tedster for the links.

In some cases I believe that I am within fair use as this is a website that is a website about history of "widgets", IE the 1964 widget collection. I then post a few scans and comment on how the 1968 widget was reported and tested by Oct 1964 "Widget Life" during it's release and coverage.

But of course I will contact my lawyer and get his input before going further with this project.

Thanks again to all who offered input.

Rob

[wolfadeus]

I think the safest option is to ask the copyright holder for permission; generally, I think QUOTING is okay, but entire articles could be tricky.

[luckychucky]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall it's fair use to re-publish content if it's well cited, in other words, if you clearly say: this came from Popular Science magazine January 2004, page 5, published by The Bob Publishing Co., Inc . New York NY. Or whatever's the proper format of citations. I can publish an article which includes a quote from someone else's book if I cite it in the footnotes. Right?

[Lobo]

If you are a fan of the magazines and are posting front covers for discussion, that's totally fine.

Problems only arise when you are scooping content to use as your own...

[wolfadeus]

luckychucky: I think this depends on whether you actually QUOTE (ie. use a small percentage from the original content to put it into context with your own work) or if you use significant chunks of content to stand by itself; I'm not a lawyer, though, so take this as an opinion only.

Best, W.