Monte Cassino cross

[kosa]

MCC#11494 Kanonier Stanisław Słowikowski, 1st Carpathian Light Artillery Regiment, 3.DSK.

Best,
Kosa

[ostro]

Dear Andrzejku,
Thank you for your candour. I had noticed a certain reluctance in previous posts when asked the question. So what did you do for PISM – type out the details or scan them? I know from just doing my 5,000 how tedious that is but one of the reasons I type is that whilst documents may be copyrighted, information is not. Microsoft Excel is my medium of choice. And you are right about the paper... some of it is like tissue paper and faint copies made on old Banda machines. God, I do love archives!
If and when they do publish there will be a huge cheer from historians and collectors alike.

Keep up the good work because until PISM comes up with the goods... you are it!!!

Best regards, Mark Ostrowski

[DRAGON]

All I can say at the moment is we owe you such a lot, thank you for all your hard work, giving us such good information, very many thanks Andrzejku.
Best to all, Dragon

[StefanM]

Gentlemen, The copyright actually could also cover the information if the compiler created the MMC list from other sources even if the information is derived from sources in the public domain. This scenario comes under an editors right to copyright which is also protected by law in the same way as authors rights the UK including Poland and probably also in countries signed up to the Berne convention.

The archives of PISM and SPP-PUMST that used to belong to the Polish government in exile are an interesting copyright case and IMO the copyright laws and ownership are misinterpreted by those at the various institutions and even we collectors and archive users.

Works produced by servants of the state are the property of the state. Meaning any documents or other works produced by serving soldiers as servants of the state such as reports, memos etc are the copyright of the state this includes works produced by diplomats, civil servants etc. But most works produced by the state are considered in the public domain under copyright law, this includes the Polish state.

With regard to non-state works held by the archives from donations etc, ownership of an original work does not normally grant ownership of copyright in the work through ownership of that work. Again this issue is most often confused by collectors who own letters, photos, manuscripts and other works by deceased authors or creators. Copyright in the content of these various works are the author's life plus 75years and after the death of the author are owned by the authors legal heirs. Unless copyright has been transferred by the author or their heirs ownership does not automatically grant copyright. So although PISM etc own work through donation they don't necessarily own the copyright in those donated works unless it has been specifically granted or transferred by the works creator or copyright owner at the time of donation. After the authors life plus 75 years has elapsed, copyright normally expires.

What further complicates the copyright situation surrounding the papers and works produced by the Polish government in exile and its servants is that once the government in exile was derecognised and the new Polish government recognised in Warsaw legally all of the works held by the former Polish government in exile became the property of the new Polish communist government as it was now the legal state of Poland. Of course for obvious reasons the exiled government did not want to hand over these works despite repeated requests from Warsaw. As they say, "Possession is nine-tenths of the law" so thankfully the documents etc remained in the UK.

An example of the copyright confusion is illustrated by the fact that Polish archives often have copies of exactly the same photograph stamped with their respective institutions copyright notice. This cannot be so, they cannot all own copyright in the same photograph under copyright law. If the photograph was produced by servants of the state ie its propaganda department or by war photographers employed by the state the copyright is owned by state and therefore in the public domain. However the institution can charge a fee for making a copy of a photo that they own but cannot claim copyright ownership in that photo.

Establishing copyright ownership is often a tricky and expensive exercise...been there many times.

[ostro]

Dear Stefan,
While I quite agree that it could be copyrighted, it would have to be a pretty good lawyer to actually pursue a case. If I discover from a document that a person was born in 1909 – even if that document is copyrighted, I find it highly unlikely that such a piece of information is protected by copyright. Ditto someone’s MCC number or the unit they served in. Unaccredited, at best, we might be accused of plagiarism if presenting a scholarly work, but information like this is information that is fair use by anyone’s definition. If this is not the case then this forum is in serious trouble!!! That concludes the case for the defence, M’lud.
Best regards, Mark OSTRO

[StefanM]

I have had to deal with many copyright ownership and rights issues in the past. The original list of MCC recipients will at one time have been drawn up by someone who at the time of allocating and cataloguing the issuing of the MCC awards was a servant of the state so this information will of course be in the public domain under existing Polish copyright and UK copyright law.

However the annotated compilation you posted on here is your copyright as editor/compiler of the list even though it is available to all to copy and paste online unless like facebook, twitter and similar site you sign over shared copyright / usage rights to them in any way whatsoever by these entities under their terms & conditions. Google T&Cs also give them the right to trawl the content of any google user email address, as does Apple, Microsoft, Yahoo user emails.

The UK is only now introducing "fair use", prior to 2014 there was no such provision under UK copyright law unlike the US, and "fair-use" in the UK only allows for limited publishing of copyrighted works - a very small proportion of the whole work in fact, scholarly work or not. One also does not have ask for a copyright owners permission under fair-use only a credit.

Surprisingly, ALL of Winston Churchill's public speeches, political memos and other scribblings and even those published in Hansard's parliamentary debates are claimed copyrighted by the Churchill Estate even though these written public speeches and utterances are effectively in the public record. To include Churchill in a book and quote him you have to pay a fee for commercial use, the estate does rigorously pursue Churchill copyright breaches.

[ostro]

Dear Andrzejku, Just a little question for now... Did Wojtek the bear from the Artillery Supply Company (22 I think) get a Monte Cassino Cross?
Just curious! Regards, Mark

[StefanM]

Me too, as Wojtek was I believe a serving soldier with his own pay book so I assume he had a service number?

[ostro]

Yes, I grew up with these stories about how he was a "real" soldier... and the Company badge was drawn with his image on, so you would think he would have wouldn't you?! I do hope he did!!!

[ostro]

Another Cassino Cross recipient: Private Walenty FLIS 1902/19/III MCC#41655
He is on the right, my grandfather Franciszek Ostrowski is on the left.


The Photograph was taken on the 13th December 1942 in Karzwin, Iran only a few months after being released from the Soviet Union. They both joined 5 Casualty Clearing Station shortly afterwards.
Flis returned to Poland after the war.

Regards, OSTRO