RARE pictures of Titanic's engine construction


Dec 2, 2000
58,614
688
483
Easley South Carolina
Just so you know, not all of those photos are exclusively of the Titanic or even her componants. An example can be seen on page one. See the 433 on those crankshafts? That number applied to the Britannic.

Still has a few photos I haven't seen before. Overall, a fairly decent website.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
5,045
317
353
The engines are for Titanic. The starboard engine is nearest the camera. In the original photo, the identifying numbers can be seen.
 
T

Timothy Trower

Guest
I couldn't find any notice of permission given to post the artwork of Ken Marschall, for starters.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,132
1,480
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
Lack of a notice of permission does not mean that permission to post certain images was not given. I noticed the site is marked with © Michael W. Pocock 2005 - 2007. There are also links provided where one can go and buy the artwork. Could very well have been an agree to post the image as long as such a link on the page was made available. If there are any copyright violations, and I say IF, then it is up to the holder of the copyright to press forward with any legal action.
 
Dec 28, 2006
119
0
111
How long does a Copyright last for ?
A patent is 20 years from publication. These plates are some 100 years old.
Surely the copyright is with the photographer and not to someone who puts his name and a date on it 2007, 96 years after the photo or plate image was produced.
I thank all who provide valid information.GORDON.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
5,045
317
353
In the US copyright lasts 70 years from the death of the author/photographer. In Australia, it's 50 years.

That means that just about everything about Titanic is copyright in the USA and most things are copyright in Australia. Colonel Gracie's book is a rare exception.

A glaring example is Francis Browne's collection. The photos were taken in 1912. He lived until 1960, so they are copyright until 2030 in the USA and 2010 in Australia.

A non-Titanic example that is glaring is the music of Irving Berlin, who died in 1989. His US copyright dies in 2059.

Personally, I think it's all over the top and it's mostly for the benefit of Disney, Time-Warner and the like.

As an author, I want to be protected from plagiarism and illegal copying during my lifetime, but if I make it to 2020 my copyright will last until 2090 in the USA. Is that reasonable for something published in 2005 and never republished?
 
Dec 28, 2006
119
0
111
Dave thanks for information.
A patent, can be checked with the Patent Office, is there a Copyright Office.?
I am now under the impression having viewed website, there is no official Office but there are private establishments acting as Notary Publique, who will note your copy and date so as to have a file to support a claim that this was first. Also that it is to be filed by the creator.
I wish to present a paper with copies of photographic plates, some maybe by Francis Brown. So I would have to have two publications. One "with" for Australia, and one "without" for USA.( The Australian's have a more practical attitude to the situation.)
Authors show copies of other plates in their books, so I can only presume that these are not copyright. It gets confusing. I will go back to website. I thank all who provide valid information GORDON.
 

Mark Baber

Moderator
Member
Dec 29, 2000
6,291
307
353
In the US copyright lasts 70 years from the death of the author/photographer.

Ummm...maybe. Look here and here, among other places, for the rules as to the duration of U.S. copyrights, which vary depending on a number of factors, and note that the second circular I linked to states that "[w]orks published before January 1, 1923, have fallen into the public domain... ."

Other national copyright offices may have similar web sites explaining their countries' copyright laws.
 
Dec 28, 2006
119
0
111
Having taken a look at the suggested rule book, am considerably more confused. One part says that if application is not made in order to continue for another 28 years then it will be continued. So why bother to make an application ?
Another part says it can be enforced up to 78 years. Then another which states , it can be extended for 95 years from the date that it was originally secured.
At an appropriate time when I am further towards my goal, I shall employ the service of a Patent Attorney, and inform the members of my finding.
I thank all who provide valid information. GORDON.
 
Mar 22, 2003
6,132
1,480
383
Chicago, IL, USA
www.titanicology.com
>>Having taken a look at the suggested rule book, am considerably more confused.<<

You and everyone else I bet. Those types of rules are written by lawyers for other lawyers to understand. That way non-lawyers have to hire a lawyer to help them understand it. It's like the tax laws. I truly believe they are written so that only tax lawyers and certified public accountants can understand them. That way you have to hire someone like that to do your yearly taxes and still hope you never get audited.

As someone once told me, it's called BUSINESS.
 

Bob Read

Member
Mar 3, 2002
393
7
171
Even if you are a lawyer, this is an area of law where it's a real crap shoot in court. I'm not a lawyer but I'd bet most if not all images which have ever been posted on this forum have been posted under the "fair use" protection. There are a number of tests to determine fair use. Some of them are whether financial gain was realized by the poster, whether it was part of an academic discussion, whether it devalued the original image, etc. As far as I can tell, most of the old images are no longer protected by copyright. That leaves newer images which were probably all covered under the aforementioned "fair use" provisions. As Sam pointed out though, the burden is on the copyright holder to assert and prove copyright infringement. As long as I have been participating in forums such as this where photos were posted for academic discussions, I have never heard of a copyright infringement suit being filed, let alone being successful.
It's kind of a boogeyman that is used to frighten those who don't understand the law and decide to bow to intimidation.

Regards,
Bob Read
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,614
688
483
Easley South Carolina
Boogyman or not, it's still the law. For the record, Encyclopedia Titanica operates persuant to and in compliance with the laws of the United Kingdom and any treaties or agreements in regards international law that the U.K. is a party to.

What that means in plain language is that the various laws of other nations may well apply. To err on the safe side, when in doubt, assume that copyright applies. It's dicey, but it beats being sued.
 

Bob Read

Member
Mar 3, 2002
393
7
171
Michael:
To say that copyright laws still apply is to state the obvious. The heart of the matter is whether copyrights exclude all use. They do not. Otherwise there would be no "fair use" provisions in the copyright laws.
It is indeed "safe" to never post a copyrighted image or even one you are not sure about. But it is also "safe" never to drive a car because there are speed limits. I'm not advocating breaking any law. I'm advocating operating within it's provisions and limits as they were intended. Here is a link to a good explanation of "fair use": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Regards,
Bob Read
 

Similar threads

Similar threads