Copyright revisited

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Hoshisato, Oct 17, 2006.

  1. Hoshisato

    Hoshisato Guest

    Not an actual example, but I have been wondering about this:
    Imagine somebody uses a photo of mine, loses the background, applies a
    couple of Photoshop filters, moves a part around changing the pose a
    little, etc. Is the resulting image infringing my copyright in the US
    and EU countries?
     
    Hoshisato, Oct 17, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hoshisato

    Paul Rubin Guest

    "Hoshisato" <> writes:
    > Not an actual example, but I have been wondering about this:
    > Imagine somebody uses a photo of mine, loses the background, applies a
    > couple of Photoshop filters, moves a part around changing the pose a
    > little, etc. Is the resulting image infringing my copyright in the US
    > and EU countries?


    Yes, that's called a "derivative work", check google or wikipedia for info.
     
    Paul Rubin, Oct 17, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hoshisato

    Hebee Jeebes Guest

    It is a derivative work. However, in a law suite the judge or who ever
    decides is going to ask him/her or themselves if there is enough of the
    original work left to qualify for copyright protection. It could go either
    way it is a copyright violation for you or if it is too hard tell that it
    was your photo it could go the other way. It would just depend on if one
    could tell that the derivative work started life as your image.

    The other problem would be what is the image a photo of. If it is a photo of
    something really common like the golden gate bridge shot from the same angle
    as 100,000 others you may have a harder time claiming copyright protection
    for it. Yes, you shot the picture but when it looks like 100,000 other shots
    of the golden gate then the power of copyright becomes much harder to deal
    with. At that point how to do you prove that it was your image that was used
    and not one of the other 100,000 very similar images or how do you know that
    the guy that made the changes didn't go shoot the image himself adding 1 to
    the 100,000 images of the golden gate?

    Unless it is something very unique I think you will find that while
    technically you have the copyright to your image, in the real world it would
    be hard to enforce as you would have to prove that he/she used your image
    and not one of his own or someone else's.

    If you are worried about someone using your images, then don't put them on
    the web. Otherwise I suggest you live with it.

    R


    "Paul Rubin" <http://> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Hoshisato" <> writes:
    >> Not an actual example, but I have been wondering about this:
    >> Imagine somebody uses a photo of mine, loses the background, applies a
    >> couple of Photoshop filters, moves a part around changing the pose a
    >> little, etc. Is the resulting image infringing my copyright in the US
    >> and EU countries?

    >
    > Yes, that's called a "derivative work", check google or wikipedia for
    > info.
     
    Hebee Jeebes, Oct 17, 2006
    #3
  4. Hoshisato

    PTravel Guest

    "Hoshisato" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Not an actual example, but I have been wondering about this:
    > Imagine somebody uses a photo of mine, loses the background, applies a
    > couple of Photoshop filters, moves a part around changing the pose a
    > little, etc. Is the resulting image infringing my copyright in the US
    > and EU countries?


    I can't speak for the EU, but in the U.S., absolutely. They have created a
    derivative work, which is one of the express rights protected by the U.S.
    Copyright Act.

    >
     
    PTravel, Oct 17, 2006
    #4
  5. Hoshisato

    PTravel Guest

    "Hebee Jeebes" <> wrote in message
    news:4535230a$0$34576$...
    > It is a derivative work. However, in a law suite the judge or who ever
    > decides is going to ask him/her or themselves if there is enough of the
    > original work left to qualify for copyright protection.


    Nope. The trier-of-fact asks only whether the accused work was derived from
    the original. There is no magic quantum of copying below which threshold
    there is no infringement.

    I've deleted the rest of your post because it remains wrong, as it was when
    I responded to it initially. I simply do not understand why lay people
    think they know the law better than those who are licensed to practice it.
    _I_ don't give legal advice to strangers on the interent. Why in the world
    would you think it appropriate for you to do so?
     
    PTravel, Oct 17, 2006
    #5
  6. Hoshisato

    Stu Guest

    Mmm. 'Hebee Jeebies' post sounded pretty spot on to me.


    "PTravel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Nope. The trier-of-fact asks only whether the accused work was derived
    > from the original. There is no magic quantum of copying below which
    > threshold there is no infringement.
    >
    > I've deleted the rest of your post because it remains wrong, as it was
    > when I responded to it initially. I simply do not understand why lay
    > people think they know the law better than those who are licensed to
    > practice it. _I_ don't give legal advice to strangers on the interent.
    > Why in the world would you think it appropriate for you to do so?
    >
     
    Stu, Oct 17, 2006
    #6
  7. Hoshisato

    PTravel Guest

    "Stu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Mmm. 'Hebee Jeebies' post sounded pretty spot on to me.


    Is that what you think?

    Here's my bar number: Californiia 160552

    What's yours?

    >
    >
    > "PTravel" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> Nope. The trier-of-fact asks only whether the accused work was derived
    >> from the original. There is no magic quantum of copying below which
    >> threshold there is no infringement.
    >>
    >> I've deleted the rest of your post because it remains wrong, as it was
    >> when I responded to it initially. I simply do not understand why lay
    >> people think they know the law better than those who are licensed to
    >> practice it. _I_ don't give legal advice to strangers on the interent.
    >> Why in the world would you think it appropriate for you to do so?
    >>

    >
    >
     
    PTravel, Oct 17, 2006
    #7
  8. Hoshisato

    Stu Guest

    Here's my bar number: Common sense, UK


    "PTravel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >
    > Is that what you think?
    >
    > Here's my bar number: Californiia 160552
    >
    > What's yours?
     
    Stu, Oct 18, 2006
    #8
  9. Hoshisato

    PTravel Guest

    "Stu" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Here's my bar number: Common sense, UK


    Yes, I'm sure your common sense vests you with a better understanding of
    U.S. copyright law than that of a licensed U.S. attorney.


    >
    >
    > "PTravel" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >>
    >> Is that what you think?
    >>
    >> Here's my bar number: Californiia 160552
    >>
    >> What's yours?

    >
    >
     
    PTravel, Oct 18, 2006
    #9
  10. Hoshisato

    JC Dill Guest

    On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:51:00 -0700, "PTravel"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Hebee Jeebes" <> wrote in message
    >news:4535230a$0$34576$...
    >> It is a derivative work. However, in a law suite the judge or who ever
    >> decides is going to ask him/her or themselves if there is enough of the
    >> original work left to qualify for copyright protection.

    >
    >Nope. The trier-of-fact asks only whether the accused work was derived from
    >the original. There is no magic quantum of copying below which threshold
    >there is no infringement.


    I believe the amount of the copying comes into play when the copying
    is "fair use", but doesn't come into play when there is no "fair use"
    argument.

    jc

    --

    "The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
    of different horses without having to own that many."
    ~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
     
    JC Dill, Oct 18, 2006
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    NVIDIA Forceware Revisited article

    Silverstrand, Sep 22, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    647
    Silverstrand
    Sep 22, 2005
  2. Caploc

    Mnenhy revisited

    Caploc, Dec 15, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    616
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 16, 2004
  3. Brad Tarver
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,069
    Brad Tarver
    Jul 9, 2003
  4. Brad Tarver
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,176
    Brad Tarver
    Jul 9, 2003
  5. Colin B
    Replies:
    195
    Views:
    3,082
    Colin B
    Jan 19, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page