Princess Elvira of Bavaria

Because the US Congress passed legislation several years ago to extend copyright protection in the US -- it has been assumed that several corporations including Disney, were instrumental in having the legislation extendd to protect their own products. In Disney's case, Mickey Mouse would have gone out of copyright (but would have remained protected by trademarks )

It can also be assumed that a good selection of photographs and other materials published between 1923 and 1960 are out of copyright (photos taken by news agencies, newspapers, etc. are still copyrighted because the agencies take care of these things). However, the onus is on the person using the image to do a copyright search -- and copyright searches are not always easy to accomplish.

Well do you know why the cut off date is 1923 ?

The US Congress extended copyright to 1923 several years ago, and the 1923 date remains for about another decade.   

A photo published before 1923 is out of copyright ... coloring photos does not give you copyright over the colored photos ...

The romanov photos do not "belong to history." If the image was original before 1923, it is out of copyright.  However,  libraries, photo agencies, etc., may own copies - and they own the rights to those copies (rights and copyrights are two different things) ...  but if the photo came from another source, such as an agency or an archive, you still need permission to use it ...

But the picture is not your copyright... i don't need it but...... if you colored it then you have some copyright..... Like The Romanov's pictures for example... they belong to the history....

Marlene, is the standard 75 years? Would that be 1933 then? Or is the standard different?

Thanks for posing this information.

The US Congress extended copyright to 1923 several years ago, and the 1923 date remains for about another decade.   

A photo published before 1923 is out of copyright ... coloring photos does not give you copyright over the colored photos ...

The romanov photos do not "belong to history." If the image was original before 1923, it is out of copyright.  However,  libraries, photo agencies, etc., may own copies - and they own the rights to those copies (rights and copyrights are two different things) ...  but if the photo came from another source, such as an agency or an archive, you still need permission to use it ...

But the picture is not your copyright... i don't need it but...... if you colored it then you have some copyright..... Like The Romanov's pictures for example... they belong to the history....

Marlene, is the standard 75 years? Would that be 1933 then? Or is the standard different?

Yes, thanks Marlene. I had assumed it was 75 years and thus 1933. That impacts my collecting for possible usage to some extent then.

Yes it does - but it all depends if the photographer renewed the copyright - and the chances are slim

The US Congress extended copyright to 1923 several years ago, and the 1923 date remains for about another decade.   

A photo published before 1923 is out of copyright ... coloring photos does not give you copyright over the colored photos ...

The romanov photos do not "belong to history." If the image was original before 1923, it is out of copyright.  However,  libraries, photo agencies, etc., may own copies - and they own the rights to those copies (rights and copyrights are two different things) ...  but if the photo came from another source, such as an agency or an archive, you still need permission to use it ...

But the picture is not your copyright... i don't need it but...... if you colored it then you have some copyright..... Like The Romanov's pictures for example... they belong to the history....

Marlene, is the standard 75 years? Would that be 1933 then? Or is the standard different?

Yes, thanks Marlene. I had assumed it was 75 years and thus 1933. That impacts my collecting for possible usage to some extent then.

Lets go back to Princess Elvira of Bavaria.

Someone posted that there was a book on her life in German ?

She still looked stylish here.

I think she was good woman....Even she looked so seriously on photos she was with good soul...

I don't know if she was a good woman, but she was serious in the photos.