 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
I'm currently working on an image which illustarates a scene in a
famous (Sci-Fi) novel. I'm doing it for my own personal amusement
only. It's very obvious from the image what the novel is (I hope :-).
I kind of think of it as a book cover.
I will probably post it to p.binaries.images at some point.
Is it likely I'm infringing any copyrights in so doing?
There was a film made of the book but my picture bears no
resemblance.
--
Bill Hails
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in article 3eda6234@news.povray.org, Bill Hails at
bil### [at] europe yahoo-inccom wrote on 6/1/03 3:28 PM:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working on an image which illustarates a scene in a
> famous (Sci-Fi) novel. I'm doing it for my own personal amusement
> only. It's very obvious from the image what the novel is (I hope :-).
> I kind of think of it as a book cover.
> I will probably post it to p.binaries.images at some point.
>
> Is it likely I'm infringing any copyrights in so doing?
>
> There was a film made of the book but my picture bears no
> resemblance.
As long as it's for your own personal enjoyment, you should be fine. Just
don't try to sell it or anything...
----------
Dan
Goofy Graffix - http://www.huntel.net/goofygraffix
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And perhaps don't post large enough version for others
to use for selling. 640x480 or something nearby isn't really a
suitable size for Posters, so you shouldn't get any hassle
then. Though I doubt that 1280x960 (my preferred size)
would make trouble.
--
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm currently working on an image which illustarates a scene in a
> > famous (Sci-Fi) novel. I'm doing it for my own personal amusement
> > only. It's very obvious from the image what the novel is (I hope :-).
> > I kind of think of it as a book cover.
> > I will probably post it to p.binaries.images at some point.
> >
> > Is it likely I'm infringing any copyrights in so doing?
> >
> > There was a film made of the book but my picture bears no
> > resemblance.
>
> As long as it's for your own personal enjoyment, you should be fine. Just
> don't try to sell it or anything...
>
> ----------
> Dan
> Goofy Graffix - http://www.huntel.net/goofygraffix
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Hails wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working on an image which illustarates a scene in a
> famous (Sci-Fi) novel. I'm doing it for my own personal amusement
> only. It's very obvious from the image what the novel is (I hope :-).
> I kind of think of it as a book cover.
> I will probably post it to p.binaries.images at some point.
>
> Is it likely I'm infringing any copyrights in so doing?
Yes. But nobody's going to sue you unless they think their bottom
line is at stake.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias v2.0 wrote:
> And perhaps don't post large enough version for others
> to use for selling. 640x480 or something nearby isn't really a
> suitable size for Posters, so you shouldn't get any hassle
> then. Though I doubt that 1280x960 (my preferred size)
> would make trouble.
>
>
Thanks for your replies. I usually end up doing a final 1200x960,
and posting a link to it.
I don't really think in terms of posters atm since my printer just
does A4, I may just keep the 1200x960 to myself this time :-).
--
Bill Hails
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 01 Jun 2003 16:28:17 -0400, Bill Hails wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working on an image which illustarates a scene in a famous
> (Sci-Fi) novel. I'm doing it for my own personal amusement only. It's
> very obvious from the image what the novel is (I hope :-). I kind of
> think of it as a book cover. I will probably post it to
> p.binaries.images at some point.
>
> Is it likely I'm infringing any copyrights in so doing?
>
> There was a film made of the book but my picture bears no resemblance.
Ideas and concepts cannot be copyrighted. The idea behind a novel cannot
be copyrighted only the embodiment of the concept in the form of the
novel.
Copyright only covers something which has been reduced to a fixed form
and it only covers that form.
The novel is one fixed form and the author owns the copyright to it.
An image is another form and you own the copyright to it regardless of
where you got the idea.
There are limits of course. Changing one paragraph in a novel does not
create a new copyright but is infringement.
As you say, your picture bears no resemblence to the movie so there is
no question of infringement.
I am watching Stargate right now. The producers only own copyright to
the episodes produced and of course physically the stage prop. If you
create a model of it that is yours as are the images you create with it. If
you crop out an image of it from a vidcapture and use it, that is an
infringement. If you sneak onto the set and take a picture of it and use
it, that is an infringement as they own the object itself as you own your
model of it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>If you sneak onto the set and take a picture of it and use
>it, that is an infringement as they own the object itself as you own your
>model of it.
Everything you say is true except this last bit. The subject of the picture
has no say over who owns it (aside form some rule about pictures of peoples
faces). A foto of a stargate set is entirely the intelectual property of
the photographer. The tricky part is a contrived bit: taking a picture of
the television as it plays SG. Scene composition and the like are obviously
yours... but what about what is actually on the tv? It gets tricky here,
but noone really cares anyway. Just dont go into advertising till you read
the books. (law books, not sci-fi novels)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
neb wrote:
> Everything you say is true except this last bit. The subject of the picture
> has no say over who owns it (aside form some rule about pictures of peoples
> faces). A foto of a stargate set is entirely the intelectual property of
> the photographer. The tricky part is a contrived bit: taking a picture of
> the television as it plays SG. Scene composition and the like are obviously
> yours... but what about what is actually on the tv?
What is actually on the TV is indeed covered by copyright, either that
of the show's producer (in which case the station is airing the program
under license) or that of the station (including such shows as news
broadcasts that are locally produced). Taking a picture of a television
program is indeed unauthorized copying (although it's probably like a
lot of other things, it would take a rediculously "in-your-face" use of
the copy to get the attention of the Copyright Gestapo).
--
Steve Martin, CPBE CBNT
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3ee05d38@news.povray.org>,
squidian <squ### [at] localhostlocaldomain> wrote:
> >>If you sneak onto the set and take a picture of it and use it, that is
> >>an infringement as they own the object itself as you own your model of
> >>it.
> >
> > Everything you say is true except this last bit.
>
> I meant sneak on to the production set they use for filming and take a
> picture, not a picture of the TV set.
That isn't copyright infringement. Stealing part of the set would be
theft, sneaking onto it is trespassing. Copyright doesn't cover physical
objects like a set, but text and imagery. However, trademark would
prevent you from duplicating props for your own use. Two good examples
are Lego (who apparently threatened lawsuits against people who made CG
images of Lego blocks) and Disney (who is at least as defensive about
their characters).
> The presumed lack of permission to photograph it means the owner of the
> set means the picture is a violation of his copyrighted design of the
> stargate. The owner controls the manner in which it may be used as he
> controls an actual episode he creates. It is the same as photographing
> the pages of a book or more likely scanning the book and claiming
> ownership. Can't be done.
No, the photograph is simply evidence of trespassing. Their lawyer may
argue in court about "intellectual property" in the set composition, but
I don't think this has anything specifically to do with copyright law.
> If the picture includes the TV and some of the room it is clearly a
> separate image. If the picture is a close up so that just the screen in
> seen, it is a single frame and considered fair use. A five second
> sequence of the gate opening is emblematic of the series and may not be
> considered fair use if incorporated in your own creation. As part of a
> fan site, feel free until they complain. Fan sites have a grey status but
> are ordinarily not discouraged.
It highly depends on what it is used for. If it is a gate opening
sequence used as an animated GIF for a webring logo, it is pretty
obviously not an attempt to profit from their work. (though a company
like Lego would still go after them)
> Take a hundred photos and include text which tells the story of an
> episode on you website and it is infringement.
>
> Of course anyone seriously considering anything like this should consult
> an attorney.
Better: the makers of the show, with a clear description and maybe a
prototype page.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
1200x960? That's a weird resolution.
640x480 is an oldtimer, but multiply it
with 2, and ya get 1280x960.
Why are you missing those 80?
--
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
>
> > And perhaps don't post large enough version for others
> > to use for selling. 640x480 or something nearby isn't really a
> > suitable size for Posters, so you shouldn't get any hassle
> > then. Though I doubt that 1280x960 (my preferred size)
> > would make trouble.
> >
> >
>
> Thanks for your replies. I usually end up doing a final 1200x960,
> and posting a link to it.
> I don't really think in terms of posters atm since my printer just
> does A4, I may just keep the 1200x960 to myself this time :-).
>
> --
> Bill Hails
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
