[David_Hayward (RIP)]

What I like about this site is the quality of the discussion and the advice. Clive, you must be right whatever the Act says simply because the de facto owner/holder of photographs or negatives can say that they simply will not release them unless conditions are met. You mention Ford, well that's a good example because Ford's British photo library is massive and has some real treasures. I am told that it may close, and I want to get in their quickly before it does as I understand that they have photos of WW2 vehicles in their arvchive. The ladies that run it are marvellous and really helpful. However aside from any courtesy that Clive has reminded us about, it would always be prudent to ask if any can be reproduced and on what terms. I for one would not like to cause offence and clarify in writing if necessary that it would be possible to use the photos that I wanted in such-and-such a book or magazine. Clive, you mention Corporation-owned photos not being Crown Copyright. This is correct inasmuch [and you are the expert here] as they were not produced for say the Department of National Defence who paid for them and thus were the copyright owners. We know that some Ford and GM of Canada official photos ended up in the National Archives as formerly DND photos. I know that the Archives will say that their records do not show who owns the copyright but when I made the comment in my previous posting I was thinking about the Act and the definition of 'owner' in relation to DND-sponsored photos. I myself have a collection that includes WW2 shots taken locally of the Canadian Mechanization Depot but they were made for the DND with copies to interested parties, and I believe them to be Crown Copyright originally as official photographs. I know GM Media Archives say that the Corporation does not have any rights over them and never did. Clive, you must be right to imply that some photos say were never Crown Copyright as they were sponsored/owned by the Corporations and never released publicly. Then even though the 50-year rule applies, contractual conditions could be placed on them. .ADDED: I have just reminded myself that some stills of vehicle assembly in the CMD, Southampton were taken from a film made in October 1940 by the Film Board or equivalent at the time and thus were definitely Crown Copyright which has now expired.

Could I therefore suggest that this is more correct:

'I am putting forward the suggestion that subject to conditions placed on them by the owners for their release, all GM of Canada, Chrysler, Ford, OF CANADA etc. official photos are out of copyright even if they were Crown Copyright originally [because they were produced and paid for the DND] '

I would feel more at ease about reproducing GM of Canada photos because Oshawa published a lot of photos in their war album and period magazines, plus distributed photos for recognition purposes worldwide so they are arguably condition-free. I have no idea still if Vintaage Historical Services in Oshawa have any wartime photos...they professed that they have nothing on production figures etc.

As to acknowledgements, as Clive rightly says, this is courteous. However certain archives with photos often it seems waive any rights that they may not legally have provided a polite request is made. However they do request an acknowledgement plus often a negative number where relevant. I cleared my use of Imperial War Museum photos recently, and no charge was levied for the right to reproduce. As you know British copyright is now 75 years so the IWM do have copyright in WW2 photos but not maps.

Can I finish here by adding that I have been in touch with the National Archives of Canada several times and they said in a letter 2 January 2004 'The copyright on these particular items has expired and they can be used for your upcoming project' provided that the compulsory line was added as mentioned above.

May I thank you once again Clive for your comments ["Clive" because we are not pissed off with him!]