Thankyou for the information..
Unfortunately for me, *sigh* Ive spent so much work on this beloved picture, that I
have
no idea on what to do *laugh*
Well, the Idea may remain, but I'll have to crap some of the connection to my
artistics
*SHIT* (Sorry about the language...)

Well, ok.... take it calm Spider ;-)

Ah, well... Can make a note on it in my .txt at least..

//Spider

Post a reply to this message

On MTV's  Real World, when they show kids wearing the latest styles, they do a
post-production a pixel blur over the logos of sports teams and brand names on
clothing.  Do they do it to avoid copyright infringement or to punish the companies
who won't pay advertising space--who knows?  But this use of trademarked logos is
about as incidental as you can get.

Jerry Anning wrote:

> A photo e.g. of a city street where some stores have ads in the window is
> generally ok.  "Incidental uses" like that are normally not considered
> infringing.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

Jerry Anning wrote:
> 
> My bottom line suggestion is: avoid "fan art" - no Enterprises, Batmen, Tie
> fighters, Mickey Mice etc.  Don't make a specific trademark or trademarked
> character the focus of your image.  And if you do have a trademarked item in the
> image, for safety's sake don't do anything that could be interpreted as
> disparaging it.

I was planning to do a scene from a novel for "Imaginary Worlds".  If all
of the artwork is original, but the concept for the scene comes from
copyrighted material, what kind of laws apply?

This would NOT be a copy of an existing illustration (well, not one that I
have ever seen).

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message

Nathan Kopp wrote:
> 
> Jerry Anning wrote:
> >
> > My bottom line suggestion is: avoid "fan art" - no Enterprises, Batmen, Tie
> > fighters, Mickey Mice etc.  Don't make a specific trademark or trademarked
> > character the focus of your image.  And if you do have a trademarked item in the
> > image, for safety's sake don't do anything that could be interpreted as
> > disparaging it.
> 
> I was planning to do a scene from a novel for "Imaginary Worlds".  If all
> of the artwork is original, but the concept for the scene comes from
> copyrighted material, what kind of laws apply?
> 
> This would NOT be a copy of an existing illustration (well, not one that I
> have ever seen).
> 
> -Nathan

I see no conflict of interest in this. If as you say your material
is original there is no one who can contest it's ownership despite
what the inspiration is.

Here is a thought -

 When I read a novel I try to mentaly picture what the author sets
up for the atmosphere for whatever part of the story I'm reading.
What I picture, in my mind, as the setting is different from what
the author pictured when he/she wrote it and it will also be
different for you. Therefore I argue that there really is nothing
that you can steal from the book because it would be stealing from
yourself.

-- 
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Nathan Kopp wrote:
> >
> > Jerry Anning wrote:
> > >
> > > My bottom line suggestion is: avoid "fan art" - no Enterprises, Batmen, Tie
> > > fighters, Mickey Mice etc.  Don't make a specific trademark or trademarked
> > > character the focus of your image.  And if you do have a trademarked item in the
> > > image, for safety's sake don't do anything that could be interpreted as
> > > disparaging it.
> >
> > I was planning to do a scene from a novel for "Imaginary Worlds".  If all
> > of the artwork is original, but the concept for the scene comes from
> > copyrighted material, what kind of laws apply?
> >
> > This would NOT be a copy of an existing illustration (well, not one that I
> > have ever seen).
> >
> > -Nathan
> 
> I see no conflict of interest in this. If as you say your material
> is original there is no one who can contest it's ownership despite
> what the inspiration is.


Sorry Ken, Nathan.  That *is* considered a copyright infringement.  If you
create an image of, say, Callandor in the Stone of Tear (nudge, nudge), even
though you create the image yourself as you imagine it, you are infringing the
author's copyright.  Incidentally, most of what I have been saying is not just
US based, but a matter of nearly universal international law (the Treaty of
Berne).

Jerry Anning
cle### [at] dholcom

Post a reply to this message

Jerry Anning wrote:
> 
> Sorry Ken, Nathan.  That *is* considered a copyright infringement.  If you
> create an image of, say, Callandor in the Stone of Tear (nudge, nudge), even
> though you create the image yourself as you imagine it, you are infringing the
> author's copyright.  Incidentally, most of what I have been saying is not just
> US based, but a matter of nearly universal international law (the Treaty of
> Berne).
> 
> Jerry Anning
> cle### [at] dholcom

If Nathan wouldn't give this image a name connected with the book and if
he wouldn't mention it in the txt-file would there be room for a law
suit?
Is the similarity with an existing book enough to justify a law suit? 
This would prohibit a lot of pictures. Showing a strong barbarian hero
in my rendering, would this allow the owner of the Conan copyrights to
sue me?
If I remember my patent and copyright course there is some room left for
creativity. 
It's a term hard to grab but I think it is connected with the
originality of the idea.

Well, this is a minefield.

Marc
--
Marc Schimmler

Post a reply to this message

> Is the similarity with an existing book enough to justify a law suit?
> This would prohibit a lot of pictures. Showing a strong barbarian hero
> in my rendering, would this allow the owner of the Conan copyrights to
> sue me?
Conan, that would be a strong thing, Koontz wrote those books once, and
the script If I remember correctly..

//Spider

Post a reply to this message

Marc Schimmler wrote:
> 
> Jerry Anning wrote:
> >
> > Sorry Ken, Nathan.  That *is* considered a copyright infringement.  If you
> > create an image of, say, Callandor in the Stone of Tear (nudge, nudge), even
> > though you create the image yourself as you imagine it, you are infringing the
> > author's copyright.  Incidentally, most of what I have been saying is not just
> > US based, but a matter of nearly universal international law (the Treaty of
> > Berne).

> 
> If Nathan wouldn't give this image a name connected with the book and if
> he wouldn't mention it in the txt-file would there be room for a law
> suit?
> Is the similarity with an existing book enough to justify a law suit?
> This would prohibit a lot of pictures. Showing a strong barbarian hero
> in my rendering, would this allow the owner of the Conan copyrights to
> sue me?
> If I remember my patent and copyright course there is some room left for
> creativity.
> It's a term hard to grab but I think it is connected with the
> originality of the idea.

Don't call your barbarian Conan and don't make him look too much like Conan book
cover art, Arnold in the movies, Conan calendars etc. and don't tell a story
that is an obvious pastiche of an actual Conan story (i.e. "Spire of the
Mammoth" (looking like the Conan story "Tower of the Elephant"), and it is OK. 
As you say, this can be a gray area.  Note that the Disney people made Marvel
make physical changes in "Howard the Duck" so that he wouldn't look too much
like "Donald Duck" even though the stories were completely different and aimed
mainly at different audiences.  For irtc purposes it is my ***OPINION*** that if
you don't use actual character names, look too much like existing art or quote
or too closely copy an existing and identifiable story, you will be ok.  Of
course, most scenes, from a visual standpoint, are generic enough to be no
problem.  A woman on a balcony isn't necessarily Juliet and the man below
doesn't have to be Romeo (incidentally, they themselves were "borrowed" from
older material!).

Jerry Anning
cle### [at] dholcom

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:39:08 -0500, Jerry Anning <cle### [at] dholcom>
wrote:

> A woman on a balcony isn't necessarily Juliet and the man below
>doesn't have to be Romeo (incidentally, they themselves were "borrowed" from
>older material!).

And, IIRC, the balcony doesn't appear in the actual stage directions.

Post a reply to this message

Marc Schimmler wrote:
> 
> If Nathan wouldn't give this image a name connected with the book and if
> he wouldn't mention it in the txt-file would there be room for a law
> suit?

But, of course, that would remove a lot of meaning from the scene.  I'm
glad I didn't start the image yet (too much programming of photon maps).
Instead, I'll probably just make up my own imaginary world.  ;-)

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message