Copyright and ownership

WW2, the photos taken by Wehrmacht Photographers...many of them dead at wars end...and The Nazi Government with no legal rights (i do not think) ...who owns the photos.?
There were still Thousands that survived.
Did they revert to ownership of the new government(s) of Germany.?
Did they become property of The Allies.?
Are they public domain.?
Or are there 101 possible scenarios.....

Photos from the German Battles like the one on the cover of this book....a photo from The Battle Of Berlin.
Thank You

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin:_The_Downfall_1945

In Canada any photograph from prior to 1949 is in the public domain.

CMoore said:

WW2, the photos taken by Wehrmacht Photographers...many of them dead at wars end...and The Nazi Government with no legal rights (i do not think) ...who owns the photos.?
There were still Thousands that survived.
Did they revert to ownership of the new government(s) of Germany.?
Did they become property of The Allies.?
Are they public domain.?
Or are there 101 possible scenarios.....

Photos from the German Battles like the one on the cover of this book....a photo from The Battle Of Berlin.
Thank You

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin:_The_Downfall_1945

Click to expand...

It probably varies from country to country.
I suspect it is public domain in the US since it belonged to the Nazi government.

I was a chemistry major in college and we had an encyclopedic book on how to make various chemicals which the US copied after the war and distributed to colleges all over the US with each book marked with a stamp documenting that the IP was a spoil of war. They also taught us just enough German to figure out the instructions.

Wallendo said:

It probably varies from country to country.
I suspect it is public domain in the US since it belonged to the Nazi government.

I was a chemistry major in college and we had an encyclopedic book on how to make various chemicals which the US copied after the war and distributed to colleges all over the US with each book marked with a stamp documenting that the IP was a spoil of war. They also taught us just enough German to figure out the instructions.

Click to expand...

That is interesting.
What kind of chemicals were they.?

Public domain

Sirius Glass said:

Public domain

Click to expand...

..... and why is that.?
Is it the same for the photos of the same time period that were shot by other countries.?

CMoore said:

..... and why is that.?
Is it the same for the photos of the same time period that were shot by other countries.?

Click to expand...

Because that is the way it works in most of the world. Yes one can always find an outlier.

The rules really do vary around the world.
One of the big areas of dispute in the recent negotiations between Canada, the USA and Mexico leading up to a replacement for NAFTA involved attempts by the US to get Canada to agree to expanded Intellectual Property, Trademark and Copyright protections - many of which are designed to protect drug patents.\
Until very recently, Canada's rules respecting copyrights of photographs taken by photographers hired by clients reflected presumptions that were almost 180 degrees different from the US rules.

CMoore said:

That is interesting.
What kind of chemicals were they.?

Click to expand...

It's been a long time, but this was basically an multi-volume encyclopedia with instructions for synthesizing just about any chemical

Another aspect, if I understand correctly, is that older copyright rules apply to images that have been printed or published in some way. Whether this applies to a negative of, say, 1945 that has never been printed until, say, yesterday may not be addressed. I expect that may be considered a new interpreted work; or more likely a moot case. The date of pressing the shutter is more important when the author is anonymous; the date of publishing is more important to a named author. But if the author is anonymous, who then claims copyright? And if you subsequently name an anonymous photographer then the published date becomes relevant.
Modern copyright specifies the copyright includes the negative and/or a digital file.
Many aspects have not been resolved as a trial case has not come up.
For example, Karsh published many photographs prior to 1949 and they did go to the common domain; yet he still lived when the copyright was extended to years after death. The result was it was possible to imagine copyright having been in the common domain and reverting to out of it. This has never been adjudicated and common domain ownership exists in practice if not in fact.