POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Copyright question Server Time
1 Aug 2024 12:26:23 EDT (-0400)
  Copyright question (Message 4 to 13 of 13)  
<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 6 Jan 2006 13:16:36
Message: <pan.2006.01.06.18.15.35.316573@nospam.com>
On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:25:48 -0500, Alain wrote:

> My opinion would be to mention the inspirational source and tell that you
> have NO intention to chalenge any copyright or intelectual property.

You may have to be careful with how you do this, though - the estate of
John Cage successfully sued another musician who published a shortened
version of 4:33 (which was a song comprised of all silence or ambient
noise) and credited Cage and the musician in question.  If he hadn't
provided credit to Cage, he probably wouldn't have been sued.

Food for thought...

Jim


Post a reply to this message

From: John VanSickle
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 02:30:05
Message: <43bf6dfd$1@news.povray.org>
Bill Pragnell wrote:

> I have a question about copyright.
> 
> Over the last few months I've posted images (see p.b.i.) of my version of
> Escher's Double Planetoid illustration. I'm thinking of rendering some
> images, including this one, for exhibition on Zazzle. Although the image
> was completely generated from scratch by me, the inspiration and concept
> obviously come from Escher's work. My question is, would I be infringing
> any existing copyright by doing this? If so, is there a way around it (i.e.
> a credit to the original artist)?
> 
> I appreciate that this isn't a 100% POV-Ray issue, but I know that some of
> you out there are by necessity familiar with the vagaries of copyright law!
> 
> Any advice on this would be very helpful.

The important thing is to find if Escher's work is still under 
copyright, or if it has passed into the public domain.

Regards,
John


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 05:23:20
Message: <43bf9698@news.povray.org>
John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> The important thing is to find if Escher's work is still under 
> copyright, or if it has passed into the public domain.

  He died in 1972, so the answer is no.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Sebastian H 
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 08:51:56
Message: <43bfc77c$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> 
>>The important thing is to find if Escher's work is still under 
>>copyright, or if it has passed into the public domain.
> 
> 
>   He died in 1972, so the answer is no.
> 

Ahem.
What exactly means no here?
Is it not under Copyright or not passed into public domain?


Post a reply to this message

From: Marc Jacquier
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 10:27:31
Message: <43bfdde3$1@news.povray.org>

news:43bfc77c$1@news.povray.org...
> Ahem.
> What exactly means no here?
> Is it not under Copyright or not passed into public domain?

2nd answer :-s

Marc


Post a reply to this message

From: Jellby
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 10:40:08
Message: <n71593-b5d.ln1@badulaque.unex.es>
Among other things, Sebastian H. saw fit to write:

>>>The important thing is to find if Escher's work is still under
>>>copyright, or if it has passed into the public domain.
>> 
>>   He died in 1972, so the answer is no.
> 
> Ahem.
> What exactly means no here?
> Is it not under Copyright or not passed into public domain?

I guess the exact copyright term depends on the country and on the date of
creation. From Wikipedia:

"The expiration time differs from country to country, but according to the
Berne Convention the minimum time is the lifetime of the author plus 50
years. In the Netherlands the term is 70 years after the death of the
author."

So, I'd say We'll have to wait some 35 years more to be sure Escher's works
are public domain...

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby


Post a reply to this message

From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 7 Jan 2006 11:50:05
Message: <dporcf$pdf$1@chho.imagico.de>
Jellby wrote:
> In the Netherlands the term is 70 years after the death of the
> author."

Like in the rest of the EU.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Landscape of the week:
http://www.imagico.de/ (Last updated 31 Oct. 2005)
MegaPOV with mechanics simulation: http://megapov.inetart.net/


Post a reply to this message

From: Bill Pragnell
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 9 Jan 2006 05:20:01
Message: <web.43c2384d5079002f731f01d10@news.povray.org>
> Among other things, Sebastian H. saw fit to write:
>
> >>>The important thing is to find if Escher's work is still under
> >>>copyright, or if it has passed into the public domain.
> >>
> I guess the exact copyright term depends on the country and on the date of
> creation. From Wikipedia:
>
> "The expiration time differs from country to country, but according to the
> Berne Convention the minimum time is the lifetime of the author plus 50
> years. In the Netherlands the term is 70 years after the death of the
> author."

According to http://www.mcescher.com/ the copyright to all of his images is
owned by the M.C.Escher Company B.V... the site appears to be quite helpful
if you want permission to reproduce his work, but I can't find anything
about derivative work. I guess the easiest way to find out is simply to ask
them...

Bill


Post a reply to this message

From: Rene Bui
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 9 Jan 2006 05:45:00
Message: <web.43c23d285079002f9055f7560@news.povray.org>
>So, I'd say We'll have to wait some 35 years more to be sure Escher's works
>are public domain...

Note that in visual arts there is also moral right, and it is perpetual as
well as inalienable in EU. It may be transmitted mortis causa to the heirs
of the author. (i.g Arts Foundations etc)
http://www.studiolo.org/CIP/VARA/Failing/Failing.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Charter
Subject: Re: Copyright question
Date: 9 Jan 2006 14:12:43
Message: <43c2b5ab@news.povray.org>
Rene Bui wrote:
>>So, I'd say We'll have to wait some 35 years more to be sure Escher's works
>>are public domain...
> 
> 
> Note that in visual arts there is also moral right, and it is perpetual as
> well as inalienable in EU. It may be transmitted mortis causa to the heirs
> of the author. (i.g Arts Foundations etc)
> http://www.studiolo.org/CIP/VARA/Failing/Failing.htm
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights
> 

Good point.

There was a great example of this in Canada concerning a sculpture by 
Michael Snow.  The sculpture depicts a flight of geese in the process of 
landing.  It is comprised of many realistic fiberglass models of geese ( 
surfaced with tromp l'oeil photographs of feathers ) suspended from the 
glassed barrel dome of a shopping mall called the Eaton Center in 
downtown Toronto.  The mall is/was? owned by Eaton's who are like the 
Macy's of Canada.  For Chrismas one year the Center's decorations 
included ribbons tied on the necks of the geese.  Snow sued to have them 
removed and won.

The incident is recounted briefly here:

http://advertisinglawyer.wld.com/news-mag-1999-04.htm

The quote mentioned here talked about "dangling earrings from the Venus 
de Milo"  but as I recall a more popular version involved the notion of 
"dangling a bell from Eaton's nose" (there is also a stature of the 
department store chain's founder in the Center)

Either way Snow's victory caused quite a stir among nominally liberal 
but somewhat provincial Canadians.  Eaton was, after all, a great man of 
commerce.  Who was some artist to challenge the great man's ego?


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.