2
2322
Guest
Yes, absolutely, it does. Staff writers and photographers rarely retain copyright to their published work (except in very unusual contract agreements.) If it appears on the front page of the Washington Post, does that make it public domain? Absolutely not. Who holds the copyright? Most likely, and in most cases, it is the publisher.
If you publish a link to their site, that is not infringement. If you publish content, even with attribution, that is infringement. That's not too difficult a concept, even for some of our less astute members here.
A caveat to that is if it's an official picture being released. If the photo (or other media) is released by a government entity such as the White House press room, then there is no copyright. The media is immediately public (unless classified as secret for some reason and, even then, the First Amendment usually protects such breaches) domain. The same is true with any media released by the major political parties.
You will find that public relations and press departments will happily waive copyright on press releases and other media simply to have their media distributed anywhere they can and such statements are usually explicitly stated as such. Again, to help the mods along, I suggest citing the source stating that copyright is waived, public, or otherwise not applicable if the media in question appears it might be copyrighted.
There are also laws about how much a person can change an existing copyrighted work to create an essentially new work. Artists do have some leeway in using copyrighted work to create new works based upon the original work. This is also a notoriously gray area so be careful if you do it.
Last edited by a moderator: