File:Studio publicity Hattie McDaniel.jpg

Cabirka muuqaalkaan: 468 × 599 pixels. Waxyaabaha kale xalinta: 187 × 240 pixels | 502 × 643 pixels.

Faylka asalka ah (502 × 643 pixels, weyninka faylka : 45 KB, nuuca MIME: image/jpeg)

Faylkaan wuxuu ka socdaa Wikimedia Commons waxaana adeegsan kara mashaariic kale. Sharaxaadda ku taal boggeeda faylka ee bogga sharaxaadda faylka halkan hoose ayaa lagu muujiyey.

Sharaxaad

Promotional photograph of actor Hattie McDaniel (1939)

Taariikhda

Unknown date

Xigasho

http://frame2interlace.wordpress.com/2011/06/19/the-first-hattie-mcdaniel-and-james-baskett/

Qoraa

Unknown author

Ogolaasho
(Dib u isticmaalka faylkaan)

This work is in the public domain because it was published in the United States between 1929 and 1963, and although there may or may not have been a copyright notice, the copyright was not renewed. For further explanation, see Commons:Hirtle chart and the copyright renewal logs.
Note that it may still be copyrighted in jurisdictions that do not apply the rule of the shorter term for US works (depending on the date of the author's death), such as Canada (70 years p.m.a.), Mainland China (50 years p.m.a., not Hong Kong or Macao), Germany (70 years p.m.a.), Mexico (100 years p.m.a.), Switzerland (70 years p.m.a.), and other countries with individual treaties.

العربية ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ українська ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Flag of the United States

This is a publicity photo taken to promote a film actor. As stated by film production expert Eve Light Honthaner in The Complete Film Production Handbook, (Focal Press, 2001 p. 211.)"Publicity photos (star headshots) have traditionally not been copyrighted. Since they are disseminated to the public, they are generally considered public domain, and therefore clearance by the studio that produced them is not necessary."

Nancy Wolff, includes a similar explanation:

"There is a vast body of photographs, including but not limited to publicity stills, that have no notice as to who may have created them." (The Professional Photographer's Legal Handbook By Nancy E. Wolff, Allworth Communications, 2007, p. 55.)

Film industry author Gerald Mast, in Film Study and the Copyright Law (1989) p. 87, writes:

"According to the old copyright act, such production stills were not automatically copyrighted as part of the film and required separate copyrights as photographic stills. The new copyright act similarly excludes the production still from automatic copyright but gives the film's copyright owner a five-year period in which to copyright the stills. Most studios have never bothered to copyright these stills because they were happy to see them pass into the public domain, to be used by as many people in as many publications as possible."

Kristin Thompson, committee chairperson of the for Cinema and Media Studies writes in the conclusion of a 1993 conference with cinema scholars and editors, that they "expressed the opinion that it is not necessary for authors to request permission to reproduce frame enlargements. . . [and] some trade presses that publish educational and scholarly film books also take the position that permission is not necessary for reproducing frame enlargements and publicity photographs."[1]

Other versions