Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Busby permission

[Phil Nuytten <72020.572@compuserve.com>]

Hi, Ray:
        My, the Busby thing got a strong reaction from the gallery! I think
you are right to want to avoid what looks like it could be problematical -
or just plain more work than it was originally thought to be - and double
ditto on any potential legal involvement - life is just too short to listen
to a couple of lawyers contradict each other - while both meters keep
running merrily on.
        In my discussion with Jim Joiner I certainly got the impression
that he stopped the project  with Frank's death because it was to be an
update, not just a re-issue of existing material. Jim said " Well. if Andy
wants to get involved, we could sure look at picking it up where we left
off . . ." Joiner has no expertise in this field, and would have to rely on
outside experts - guys like Don Walsh, or Will Foreman, or John Whitney, or
Doug Privett, or a dozen, or so, others - to provide the factual material.
Andy Busby, likewise, has no expertise in this field . .but he could
coordinate the effort, rely on some of his father's contacts, and just
generally make sure that it gets done.(  Andy, by the way, is not a kid -
he is a fortyish guy who works as computer specialist for some large outfit
in Florida.)Jim Joiner will not do this thing on his own or on Best's
behalf - it's just too much work. If Andy wasn't willing to work on it,
Best wouldn't do an update. They  may wish to do a re-issue, since that's a
no-brainer . . . just check out the photo rights and do it. It was Jim who
told me that very often in the public domain stuff, the photo rights are
one time use, and have to be re-authorized for another edition - but also
very often, there is no record of what was agreed! . They do this stuff all
the time. I don't pretend to have any expertise ( Jon's comments
notwithstanding) in publishing, but Joiner sure does! I know that in my
published efforts, the photo rights were sometimes 'one use', sometimes
'full permission' ( whatever that can be interperted to mean!) but most
often, simply did not specify. If Frank failed to get the proper releases
for a public domain document . . .so, sue him! Along this line,  Jonathan
asked what evidence I had that the photo rights were not in the public
domain . . .or words to that effect. Well, I supplied a number of the
pictures of our stuff and signed no releases, and I sure as hell still own
the copyrights on those shots. Frank asked me for photos, I gave him a
bunch and he used what he wanted. I suspect that the same is true for at
least some amount of the other  material in the book. Having said that, if
some reasonable person wanted to use our material on a Busby reprint, I
would have no objection at all. I believe that  all or most of the
copyright holders would feel the same way and authorize the re-use as a
matter of course. The problem is that you can't sure without checking with
everybody. I think that was the basic point that Joiner wanted to make and
I tried to pass on.  
        If Joiner and Busby decide not to do anything on an up-date, or
something doesn't happen in a reasonable time frame ( insert your own
definition of 'reasonable') then I think that a reprint in some form,
website or hard copy is a great idea.  Psubs is probably as good a venue as
any . . . Hmmm, I'm getting a little long-winded, as usual . . Ray,the
original idea of making  Frank's stuff available again strikes a responsive
chord in all parties, IMHO. But the soup-nazi approach of "you can't stop
us", is sort of the opposite of that. 
Phil Nuytten