Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> I have a question about both IRTC procedure and perhaps a bit
> of copyright law.  I don't expect definitive answers, but I also
> don't want to get anyone in trouble with my entry.  So...
> 
> One of the principles of photorealistic rendering, according
> to Bill Fleming (www.serious3d.com) is to use familiar objects.
> In his example scene he uses some Energizer batteries, a
> Fujifilm disposable camera, and a book that looks like it
> was scanned from life.  My question is, what is the legality
> of this?  Is it legal, for example, to take the label off a
> can of soup, scan it, and use the scanned image as an imagemap
> on a modeled can of soup?
> 
> This is actually two separate questions:
> 
> 1) Is it legal to do this at all, regardless of what I
>    plan to do with the image, without getting explicit
>    releases from the companies whose artwork I'm using?
>    (The question wouldn't bear considering except that
>    we're talking about art.  Did Andy Warhol have to get
>    Campbell's to sign something?  Do artists who work
>    in collage have to be careful what they use lest they
>    trip over intellectual property laws?)
> 
> 2) Assuming it is legal to do this in the art world,
>    is it legal in IRTC?
> 
> As I said, I don't expect definitive answers, and I'll pose
> the first question to Mr. Fleming myself, but I'm interested
> in any opinions the readers of this group might have.

Copyright law isn't really the issue in this case.  You want to consider
trademark law, a whole 'nother thing.  Collages, etc are generally safe, but use
as a major theme (or by itself) can be a problem (i.e. the previously cited day
care center).  Acknowledging the tm in the text file probably wouldn't hurt. 
The big things are not using it to compete with the trademark holder, not
disparaging the trademark holder or his product (except for "satire" - at your
own risk) and above all, not genericizing the trademark (don't say "xerox" when
you mean "copy", for example).  Genericizing, if too common, can take away the
trademark-ness of the word or symbol, as happened to "aspirin" among others and
corporate lawyers watch for that sort of thing.
As to the IRTC, the admins don't censor images.  They ask you not to get them in
trouble, but it is up to you to know how to comply.  There have been images in
the past, quite frequently in fact, that used trademarks and copyright material,
often in a definitely actionable way (for example a "fan art" Batman image in
the Night round).  Fan art is *NOT* "fair use" and can cause you or the IRTC
trouble.  OTOH, a real soup can on a kitchen counter with other objects that is
not the point of the image should be no problem.  In any case, the image would
be allowed in, but some judges may be uncomfortable (and grade accordingly) if a
usage looks legally questionable.

Jerry Anning
cle### [at] dholcom

Post a reply to this message