Publication of an Internet-accessible database resource for Arts et Metiers graphiques

Arts et Metiers graphiques (AMG) was a prominent French graphic arts magazine that was published in 68 issues from 1927 to 1939. Charles Peignot, head of the French typefoundry Deberny et Peignot, created the publication. Deberny et Peignot was the leading company of its kind in France. It manufactured not only thousands of metal type designs, but also machinery, furniture, and accessories for sale to the typesetting and printing industries. Charles Peignot, a young visionary with presses, metal type, and personal connections at his disposal secured his legacy in graphic arts history with the publication of Arts et Metiers graphiques. In it, he wanted to cover all the subjects near or far from printing, of its history, and its diverse contemporary manifestations. In over ten years of publication Peignot\u27s wide editorial goal encompassed subjects ranging from illustration, the history of the book and printing techniques and the then-expanding disciplines of advertising design and modern art photography. The magazine also featured regular reviews of fine limited-edition books and reprints of classical literature excerpts in typographically innovative layouts. Each edition was printed on high-quality papers with frequent tipped-in plates and inserts. Until the Second World War forced the magazine to cease production, Arts et Metiers graphiques was one of the highest standards for graphic arts magazines of its time. This thesis describes the creation and implementation of a web-based database providing access to the digitized content of Arts et Metiers graphiques

Who Owns This Text?: Plagiarism, Authorship, and Disciplinary Cultures

Carol Haviland, Joan Mullin, and their collaborators report on a three-year interdisciplinary interview project on the subject of plagiarism, authorship, and property, and how these are conceived across different fields. The study investigated seven different academic fields to discover disciplinary conceptions of what types of scholarly production count as owned. Less a research report than a conversation, the book offers a wide range of ideas, and the chapters here will provoke discussion on scholarly practice relating to intellectual property, plagiarism, and authorship---and to how these matters are conveyed to students. Although these authors find a good deal of consensus in regard to the ethical issues of plagiarism, they document a surprising variety of practice on the subject of what ownership looks like from one discipline to another. And they discover that students are not often instructed in the conventions of their major field.https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/usupress_pubs/1025/thumbnail.jp

Co-Authorship Between Photographers and Portrait Subjects

work with the intent of merging their contributions into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole, the authors are considered joint authors. For photographic works, judicial precedent establishes that the creative contributions necessary to support a copyright claim include the author’s choices concerning elements such as lighting, pose, garments, background, facial expression, and angle. In many visual works, however, those creative elements are determined not solely by a photographer, but also by the subject, who can sulk or smile, stand with good posture or stoop, and be situated in full light or obfuscated by shadow, among many other options. A subject’s rights in photographs have not been fully explored. The Supreme Court avoided deciding the issue more than a century ago. Today, paparazzi and celebrities make high-stakes legal assertions about copyright infringement and fair use through litigation. Certain portrait photographs of an individual person may be works of joint authorship, the co-authors being the photographer and the subject. While it is established across the globe that photographs merit copyright protection, and that the rights in a photograph generally vest in the photographer, it is a mistake to allow the authorial inquiry into every photograph to end there. Copyright law is accustomed to doing the hard work of specific factual analysis; its fair use doctrine requires such scrutiny, and an apportionment of joint authorship should be no different. The construction of joint authorship is legally flexible, at least in the manner that it is codified. This Article proposes making better use of a framework that already exists in US copyright law. No legislative change is necessary, but courts’ current interpretation of joint authorship requires recalibration to permit more flexibility. Such a stance will more accurately reflect how creative people work together and will bestow rights more fairly and on creative parties, which will sometimes include photographic subjects