MICHAEL BOWEN spoke thusly to: DICK ROEBELT
MB> MB>When I got married, I personally knew the photographer.  He
MB> MB>took the pictures on the "wide" film (I don't remember the
MB> MB>size), which means we have to take the negatives to a
MB> MB>professional place when we want pictures.  The negatives are
MB> MB>individually sleeved, and of course the envelope has the
MB> MB>photographers name on it with a copyright label.  In order for
MB> MB>the copy place to make a picture from the negative, we had to
MB> MB>take the negative out of the sleeve so that they would not be
MB> MB>violating copyright laws.
MB> DR> The law was broken regardless of sleeve being removed or
MB> DR> staying in place.
MB>In what way was the law broken?  I am the legal owner of the only
MB>copy of the negatives. 
   As you stated it had "photographers name on it with a copyright 
label" (a showing of reservation of rights by the author).  Had you 
owned the "right" to make reproductions, said right would have to be 
conveyed in writing. 
   I own a copy of the latest Windows magazine which arrived in the 
mail recently.  I still have no right to make a copy of it (except for 
archival purposes).
   If you "own" those negatives then the only right by law that you 
have is to make a duplicate set of the negatives and store them for 
safekeeping.  You have absolutely no right or license to turn them 
into photographs w/o express permission.
   Dick
I am long past innocence and fast approaching apathy.
* CMPQwk 1.42 84 *
--- Platinum Xpress/Wildcat! v1.1
---------------