Charles C wrote:
> Anybody?   Did I ask a bad question?
> 

I'm not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. My experience is only
with USA photography law, and even then it's only what I've read in books.

Now, that's out of the way. This is one place where photography law
really should be a good guide for copyright law, but it isn't yet. If I
own a desk and take a picture of my desk for some collage, there is no
problem. If I used that picture in an advertising campaign for something
else, say a chair, there could be a problem as they might believe I'm
portraying their desk in a bad light. I realize there is not a lot of
difference between those two, but that seems to be where the line is
drawn for copyright of an object. In the first, the desk is simply an
object that is used for some artistic purpose while in the second case
it's being used as a desk for the commercial gain of someone else.

The real test, at least for photography, is recognizability. Would the
average person, looking at the picture of that desk and an actual
version of that desk, believe that there was no possible way that you
created the picture from something else. This goes for just about
anything, from buildings, to people, even to pets. Again, there is a
problem here. It's not a protection, it's just a defense. If someone
thinks you took a picture of them walking down the street and used it
for a commercial purpose without their consent, they can sue. Saying
that you can not recognize them in the picture will no keep you out of
court* if they believe otherwise. Saying to a jury that 'all you can see
is a human shape, a black t-shirt and jeans.' how ever is a defense and
a reason to avoid having to pay anything other then your lawyer.

The last case is just the switching of media. Say I buy a reproduction
of a sculpture and photograph it. I wouldn't sell that as a commercial
photo, as I do not have the release of the owner. There is a photography
case where someone took a picture of several puppies, sold posters of
that picture, and later someone else made a sculpture using those
posters as a reference. It was ruled copyright infringement, since the
picture was used as a guide and not just as inspiration. It is still
infringement if your sole inspiration was another artist's work.

I look at that desk, and I see one that looks a bit like my work desk.
Maybe it looks like one my father has too. But put your picture beside
one of the real desk and see if they look identical. Then see if your
picture looks identical to desks made by someone else. Since it doesn't
look like a designer art piece masquerading as furniture, I'd say you
could find a dozen different desks that look close enough that no one
could say which one you used for inspiration.


*USA legal system note: It might not keep you out of court even if it
was demonstratively not them in the picture. You could have a model
release from another person, and plenty of notes saying that it was
someone else in the picture, but any person can sue for just about any
reason if they have enough money to keep a lawyer around.

Post a reply to this message