Copyright question...

[KillerMuffin]

Okay, if you take a picture that's obviously a photograph of, oh, say the perfect frame of a cartoon that just completely describes you, who would own the copyright? The picture taker or the cartoonist?

 

[Jim_Henson]

Running on a lack of logic, you cant take photos in art galleries can you?

 

[modest mouse]

I believe such a photo would reprsent an 'intellectual property', that property being the cartoon. You would not own the copyright. Thats my understanding but Im not a lawyer.

You can still send me pics though.

hotcockforyou@allnight.cum

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Okay, if you take a picture that's obviously a photograph of, oh, say the perfect frame of a cartoon that just completely describes you, who would own the copyright? The picture taker or the cartoonist?

You are not creating the image, you are copying it - therefore the creator (the cartoonist) owns the copyright. However you copy the image, with a camera, a photocopier, a scanner, or copying a file with a computer - the copyright owner (usually the creator unless he/she signed away or sold the copyright) is who holds the copyright.

 

[Fly_On_Wall]

Okay, if you take a picture that's obviously a photograph of, oh, say the perfect frame of a cartoon that just completely describes you, who would own the copyright? The picture taker or the cartoonist?

Muffie if you want it as an av....

okay here's my way of thinking. Since everything we do in life is copywrite infrengment lol.

use whatever pic you want as an av. if you are told, take it down then take it down, if not who cares use the damn thing.

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

Running on a lack of logic, you cant take photos in art galleries can you?

Sometimes you can, but I don't believe it has to do with copyrights, at least not with some antiquity art - I believe it has to do with such things as bothering other people and so on.

http://www.oit.umass.edu/publications/at_oit/Archive/fall00/mona-lisa.html

 

[Sandia]

My own belief is that using a single frame of a cartoon would be "fair use."

I'm not a lawyer though. I'm a doctor:

Butthead: "I'm like a doctor. Uh. An orthodontist? I'm gonna have to ask you to take off your clothes..."

Beavis: "Yeah! Heh-heh. Me too! Heh. I'm Bones..!"

Butthead: "Shut up, Beavis! I was about to score!"

I'm going to have to ask you to take off your clothes...

 

[KillerMuffin]

My belief is that if I don't want people doing it to me, then I shouldn't be doing it to them.

 

[T.H. Oughts]

Okay, if you take a picture that's obviously a photograph of, oh, say the perfect frame of a cartoon that just completely describes you, who would own the copyright? The picture taker or the cartoonist?

The cartoonist still owns it as you have just made a copy of his copyright work... You own the photograph paper, but you do not mave the right to publish or print the photo because the image on the photgraph paper still belongs to him the cartoonist.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Thanks STG, TH!

 

[Sandia]

FAIR USE ANALYSIS

The Copyright Act in Section 107 enumerates four "fair use factors" that must be analyzed to determine whether a particular use of a copyrighted work, such as a parody, is fair use. These factors are the (1) purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercially motivated or instead is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) nature of the copyrighted work; (3) amount and substantiality of the portion used in the newly created work in relation to the copyrighted work; and (4) effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. A court when evaluating a fair-use defense takes into consideration each of the four factors as no single factor by itself is sufficient to prove or disprove fair use. The following discussion will describe the specific fair use criterion and provide an overview of the key issues involved in the analysis of the fair-use defense.

Lloyd L. Rich: http://www.publaw.com/parody.html

Free speech is also a consideration when it comes to copyrights.