Rider-Waite Deck Copyright?

gregory

If you use a version that was colored by US Games that robber baron Stuart Kaplan will come after you.
No robber. Were it not for him, tarot might not have taken off in the way that it did after he republished the 1JJ. I think he is wrong about the copyright thing - but he's no robber baron. And I'd hate it to show up on bog roll and underwear.

That said - yes, many of the books DID pay, Michael, though obviously I can't vouch for all of them. tarotbear can tell you all about that - he found an alternative when he republished, as he couldn't afford to pay their fees again.

Fair use is under 10% or something. I don't know the detail... But if you need RWS imagery - PM me; I can offer a suggestion...
 

tarotbear

There must be thousands of books showing RWS and other Tarot cards. I wonder, did most of the authors pay for (or get for free) the permission to publish the pictures? Are their books potentially going to be taken off the market, otherwise? How can you find out what is in the public domain and what is not? What about the "fair use" policy? Maybe some folks experienced could explain all that a little more in general here. I'd appreciate it as it may well become an issue for me, too (and others on the forum) in the near future.

Yes - they pay that copyright - YES THEY DO.

If anyone tells you that you can use pre-USGS RWS images copyright-free - they are WRONG. USGS owns the copyright for all RWS images regardless of how old they are or who may have owned them previously. There is such a thing as 'copyright restoration' for items that were once in the public domain - see this link - http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/copyright-restoration.html

BTW - some things in the public domain still carry copyrights - oh, yeah!

No matter how much everyone bitches and complains about it, USGS has the copyright sewn up until 2021, so you will all have to just wait for the next 7 years to pass.

BTW - I think Mr. Kaplan and USGS did the right thing in getting this extended - and I wish all these people who keep complaining about 'what a wicked EVIL EMPIRE USGS is' would place themselves in USGS' shoes because they would have done the exact same thing. Once the copyright has legally ended in 2021 I expect that Pixie's wonderful images will appear on everything from cans of soda to tampon holders ... and I can't understand why this is such a 'good thing.'

I agree with gregory - if it were not for Mr. Kaplan - we probably would not have Tarot existing the way we know it today.
 

tarotbear

That said - yes, many of the books DID pay, Michael, though obviously I can't vouch for all of them. tarotbear can tell you all about that - he found an alternative when he republished, as he couldn't afford to pay their fees again.

Without going too 'meta' here - when I published my original book I directly paid USGS a 'modest' fee to use the RWS images. What I didn't know is that it is NOT a one-time fee - it is payable every 2-3 years as long as the book is in publication (not print), so my publisher was obviously paying that royalty on my book while it was in print. The royalty did not cover the book 'for life', nor did it cover my book if I reprinted it.

Those fees changed greatly in the past 10 years. Since I would not be able to afford them - much less pay them every 3 years {if memory serves they were @ $1K a year, average}- I sought out an alternative (thank you, gregory!) which is also the reason I designed my own deck for one of the books.
 

tarotbear

Copyrights & Fair Use

Here are some commentaries about 'Fair Use':

U S copyright office: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Internet legal service lawyer:http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/fair-use-rule-copyright-material-30100.html

Hope this clarifies or helps ... BTW - if you are not in the US - copyrights also vary (but not much) by country although that seems to be standardizing ...

If your intention is to use the 78 RWS images in your book ... that would hardly be considered 'Fair Use.'
 

tarotbear

One More thought:

Even if you only wanted to use 4 cards from 20 different decks claiming 'Fair Use' you would still have to contact the publisher of all those decks for permission, and your book would have to have a page where you acknowledge the deck and the publisher - and state 'Used with Permission.' OH, Yeah! Any time you use someone else's work other than your own - expect that you will have to give an acknowledgement, and 'giving someone credit' is not the same as 'obtaining their permission,' nor does it constitute 'paying them a royalty.'
 

Zephyros

One More thought:

Even if you only wanted to use 4 cards from 20 different decks claiming 'Fair Use' you would still have to contact the publisher of all those decks for permission, and your book would have to have a page where you acknowledge the deck and the publisher - and state 'Used with Permission.' OH, Yeah! Any time you use someone else's work other than your own - expect that you will have to give an acknowledgement, and 'giving someone credit' is not the same as 'obtaining their permission,' nor does it constitute 'paying them a royalty.'

This is especially true of internet sites. Too often people think that a disclaimer claiming that no copyright infringement is intended, and that the copyright holders can contact the site owner if they wish, is enough or the right thing to do. That's after the damage has been done, with the picture probably having already been copied endless times.
 

Mabuse

The RWS is the Happy Birthday of Tarot decks!

Yes - they pay that copyright - YES THEY DO.

If anyone tells you that you can use pre-USGS RWS images copyright-free - they are WRONG. USGS owns the copyright for all RWS images regardless of how old they are or who may have owned them previously. There is such a thing as 'copyright restoration' for items that were once in the public domain - see this link - http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/copyright-restoration.html

BTW - some things in the public domain still carry copyrights - oh, yeah!

No matter how much everyone bitches and complains about it, USGS has the copyright sewn up until 2021, so you will all have to just wait for the next 7 years to pass.

BTW - I think Mr. Kaplan and USGS did the right thing in getting this extended - and I wish all these people who keep complaining about 'what a wicked EVIL EMPIRE USGS is' would place themselves in USGS' shoes because they would have done the exact same thing. Once the copyright has legally ended in 2021 I expect that Pixie's wonderful images will appear on everything from cans of soda to tampon holders ... and I can't understand why this is such a 'good thing.'

I agree with gregory - if it were not for Mr. Kaplan - we probably would not have Tarot existing the way we know it today.

Could works published BEFORE 1923 have the copyright restored? I don't think so!

From the same website.
http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/copyright-expiration.html

"First, the easiest case of all: works published before 1923 are in the public domain."

In my opinion, the RWS, like the song Happy Birthday, is not genuinely under copyright protection but is often treated as such because of legal bullying by parties wrongly claiming ownership.
 

tarotbear

In my opinion, the RWS, like the song Happy Birthday, is not genuinely under copyright protection but is often treated as such because of legal bullying by parties wrongly claiming ownership.

I think the 'bullying' here is being done by those who want to see USGS lose the copyright at all costs. The image of the Mona Lisa is the image of the Mona Lisa - whether the photograph was taken in 1890 or 1990 - if the image is licensed by the Louvre then the image is licensed by the Louvre. I am a firm supporter of USGS & the RWS copyright and like I've said before - you'll just have to wait until 2021 to grab those images to abuse as you will ... dems da breaks. :smoker:

The book 'Lorna Doone' was written something like 130 years ago; it is still under copyright and therefore NOT in the public domain merely because of it's age or when the author died.
 

Mabuse

I think the 'bullying' here is being done by those who want to see USGS lose the copyright at all costs. The image of the Mona Lisa is the image of the Mona Lisa - whether the photograph was taken in 1890 or 1990 - if the image is licensed by the Louvre then the image is licensed by the Louvre. I am a firm supporter of USGS & the RWS copyright and like I've said before - you'll just have to wait until 2021 to grab those images to abuse as you will ... dems da breaks. :smoker:

The book 'Lorna Doone' was written something like 130 years ago; it is still under copyright and therefore NOT in the public domain merely because of it's age or when the author died.

Lorna Doone is in the public domain.
https://archive.org/stream/lornadoonearoma02blacgoog/lornadoonearoma02blacgoog_djvu.txt
I'll re-state my case. Because the RWS images were created prior to 1923, they are in the public domain at least in the USA. I know of no case where copyright was restored to any work published before that year.
 

tarotbear

O.K. - I'll accept the fact that Lorna Doone FINALLY went into the public domain ... but I still state that the copyright on the RWS images will NOT run out until 2021 and the images are the images Pixie drew in 1910. You need to read the next couple of sections on your link about what happened with Congress botching up the 1909 Act and what they tried to correct with the 1976 copyright act. Regardless, USGS filled out the correct forms in the correct places (and paid the correct people, I am sure) and got the images copyrighted so no matter when the images were drawn they are legally and correctly copyrighted under US law and we have to wait for that copyright to legally end. By the time everyone finally gets tired of discussing this issue and dissing USGS and Stu Kaplan the next 7 years will have gone by and it will be 2021 at long last.

When you are almost 60 like I am - another 7 years is a mere drop in a bucket ...