Copyright, Diggers and archaeology

[P Prentice]

lol. pps5 has a presumption in favour of understanding rather than record so put that in your pipe.....

[Unitof1]

ahhh the ........ retorte gets them everytime-when are you going to make it to a p p paragraph p p prentic I said despariatyr ly trying not to fall into hostys oneliner trap..and lights a cigaraett (its been so long i dont know how to spell cigrattefate..it comes out all vouuyertteghdyyerer

[ShadowJack]

[SIZE=3]I think copyright is important for the definition of an ?archaeologist?.
[/SIZE]

No it isn't - copyright has no place in how I define myself as an illustrator, copyright is merely a tool I employ to protect my rights of ownership to the artwork I create (as a freelance illustrator) and to ensure the work I licence to others is not mis-used or mis-represented.

And I'm pretty you'd get the same response from other artists, musicians, playrights, directors and authors.

copyrights of the diggers automatically passed to the ?employer?

No it didn't - it is a 'right' they never had in the first place by the very nature of their employment

contracts should specifically say that the digger will not retain any copyright produced in the course of the employment.

Employee contracts, which cover terms and conditions, may not necessary be the best place to draw attention to the fact that under current UK legislation, all copyright, in the first instance resides with the employer. As you have worded it above, it implies that diggers would be required to surrender copyright they have produced. You do not produce copyright, copyright is acquired through the act of creation of unique pieces of work by a creator (artist/author etc). In archaeology, this will normally be the unit/organisation you work for.

For example - at the moment I work full-time as an illusrator for a unit. They acquire the copyright to all the artwork I produce the instant it is created. However, when I am contracted on a free-lance basis to produce similar artwork - I instantly acquire copyright and physical ownership of the works before the ink has dried of the CPU has cooled down. Unless I have agreed, in writting, to transfer such ownership/copyright to the client.

By missing out the copyright they can get to talk about

What are you hinting at - that there is some dark ,shady, conspiracy (probably made up of charitably, pension-wielding, public sector, employing-more-than-one employers) actively seeking to rob you of your non-existant rights?

Whats professional commercial copyright got to do with it?

What? As opposed to amateur commercial copyright?

You are missing my points.

Thta's a bit rich coming from you!

[Unitof1]

shaddow jack imagine that you are a landowner and you invite an archaeologist to work on your land.

What would you expect the archaeologist to produce?

[ShadowJack]

A report and an invoice?

[Unitof1]

why doesnt the landowner just produce the report themselves. Why bother with an archaeologist?

[P Prentice]

because the curators wont let him unless he is in the ifa - lol

[ShadowJack]

@unitof1

Because, unless in his previous incarnation, he happened to be an experienced, professional archaeologist, the curators would likely reject the report for failing to meet the required standards (as a landowner, is he likely to be aware of how t

[P Prentice]

in units noddy xanadu there are no curators and no HER, there are only context sheets

pppppplease dont smoke on my account unit

[Marcus Brody]

What are you hinting at - that there is some dark ,shady, conspiracy (probably made up of charitably, pension-wielding, public sector, employing-more-than-one employers) actively seeking to rob you of your non-existant rights?

Business as usual for Unitof1, then. I can't say I've had any cause to regret my decision to block his posts, though obviously I still get a sense of them reflected in the comments of others!:face-stir: