Copyright question...

[WeLoveLilo05]

I was wondering if anyone could answer this question for me b/c I don't want to do anything that is illegal or goes against copyright.

K, my mom is a big fan of Adam Lambert and finding merchandise with his face on it is pretty difficult (well aside from his concert Ts and stuff but she has them). So I was wondering if I would be able to do this...or is this copyright infringement.

cut, copy and paste a picture of him from a website, save it to my computer, load it on to snapfish and then put it on a mug or something.

There are people who take pics from his concerts and trade them on his fan site, but I am not a member of his fan site and I don't know how I would be able to obtain them if the idea above is not doable.

Any other suggestions?

Thanks for the help!

 

[Handbag Lady]

I was wondering if anyone could answer this question for me b/c I don't want to do anything that is illegal or goes against copyright.

K, my mom is a big fan of Adam Lambert and finding merchandise with his face on it is pretty difficult (well aside from his concert Ts and stuff but she has them). So I was wondering if I would be able to do this...or is this copyright infringement.

cut, copy and paste a picture of him from a website, save it to my computer, load it on to snapfish and then put it on a mug or something.

There are people who take pics from his concerts and trade them on his fan site, but I am not a member of his fan site and I don't know how I would be able to obtain them if the idea above is not doable.

Any other suggestions?

Thanks for the help!

I don't think you can do that because SOMEONE is making money off of his picture. If you were to find a picture of him and on your home computer print out an iron-on and stick it on your shirt, tote bag or whatever, then you are fine.

But, places that exchange money for goods would more than likely not allow you to make a mug. Is there a home mug-making kit at the craft store?

 

[jmkjr72]

i doubt you can do that the problem is you dont own the rights to the picture you are using first off
even if it was a pic you took it is very hard also

to give you an idea how strict copyrights can be

i run a scooter related forum
i went to zazzel to create some gear for my forum and riding group

there copyright division had 2 issues i had to resolve
first off i had to prove that my scooter wasnt a vespa even though it looks exactly like a vespa(genuine stella) guess vespa has a copy right on the image of the scooter

second was i had to remove the badges in the picture becuase genuin has a copyright on how the stella is scrolled on the scooter

what made things easier for me is i am friednds with the owner of the scooter shop got a letter from them saying the rising group was assoicated with them and a copy of the letter from genuine that gives them permsion to use the likeness of there scooters and logos

 

[Liberty Belle]

I tried to make an apron for my husband once that had a picture of Halo's Master Chief wearing a chef's hat (a disser photoshopped it for me) and zazzle wouldn't do it.

 

[WeLoveLilo05]

ugh, this is so frustrating!
But when people go to concerts (not just his, other bands and singers) I notice people wearing homemade type of shirts, wonder how they went about it.

I've made iron on shirts before and they just don't last through washings

 

[Ceila]

Using a photograph that someone else took is absolutely copyright infringement unless you have their permission.

 

[WeLoveLilo05]

Using a photograph that someone else took is absolutely copyright infringement unless you have their permission.

but if i get the picture from someone who took it at his concert and was allowing people to use it then its ok right?

 

[tvguy]

but if i get the picture from someone who took it at his concert and was allowing people to use it then its ok right?

I certainly am not aware of any law that would prevent that.

 

[disneychrista]

YOU could do this but Snapfish can't.

 

[IDoDis]

You can put the image on a mug yourself with this special decal paper. Here's a link with instructions:

http://www.mcgpaper.com/howtomakdecf.html

 

[Feralpeg]

It's sort of like having a picture taken by a professional photographer. Even if you purchase the picture from the photographer, you cannot take it to someplace like Walgreens and have it reproduced. They will not do it unless you have a release from the photographer. To do so, they could receive a $10,000 fine and lose their license to print photos. The rights to the actual photo still belong to the photographer. You just purchased a copy of it from him/her.

 

[NotUrsula]

Two issues. One, there is the copyright on the photo; if you get the photographer's permission in writing you are past that one. The much tougher one is the probable trademark that covers the image of the performer. Most concerts have rules against taking photos for just this reason, so that no one can sell those images without paying a license fee to the performer. No commercial print shop will print custom image merchandise with the image of a famous person, because doing so would expose them to trademark infringement liability.

 

[DMRick]

Is it copyright infrindgement? Yes, Can you do it? People do all the time. This board has an area where you can get Disney graphics others have pulled and photoshopped, to put on magnets and shirts. Even though the shirts aren't being sold, it's copyright infringement. People put them on shirts and wear them to DW all the time. That hurts the amount of shirts DW sells to people (and is against the law). Most people say, so what, they make lots of money off of me, and I'm not selling them. But it's no different than what you are wanting to do. Would you be arrested? Prob not. Is it copyright infringement and against the law? Yes. Do people ignore that law? Yes, all the time.

 

[Ceila]

but if i get the picture from someone who took it at his concert and was allowing people to use it then its ok right?

Many concert venues/performers don't allow cameras or photography by those who are attending. If that was the case at the concert your friend was at, and he took a picture anyway, it might still be a problem. If there were no restrictions on photography at the venue, then you might be in the clear.

In either case, though, because so many venues have that rule, you might have a hard time finding a printer who will work with you. They don't want to get in trouble on the off chance the photo should never have been taken in the first place or that you stole the photo from someone else. I am learning photography myself, and for formal photos of my kids I sometimes set up a black drape in my kitchen as a backdrop. I had to prove to one of the local printers that I took the pics myself, because they are so cautious about people poaching professional photographer's work.

 

[bonoriffic]

If you are using an image that the author has waived any copyright claim to, you are all set. Many print shops won't know that and may not print it though.

Just because someone is famous doesn't give them a copyright/trademark to images legally taken of them as someone suggested. You can never claim the rights to an original work (such as a picture) someone else is the author to.

You can change a copyrighted imaged substantially, thus a derivative work, with no issue. Think the Obama Hope image. That was tricky because they just changed the color palate, but the idea is even a copyrighted image can be manipulated into a new "work" with no problems.

 

[DMRick]

You can change a copyrighted imaged substantially, thus a derivative work, with no issue. Think the Obama Hope image. That was tricky because they just changed the color palate, but the idea is even a copyrighted image can be manipulated into a new "work" with no problems.

It has to be changed, as you said substantially. A lot of times people think they have changed it enough, but I seldom see that. I deal with copyrights in my work all the time, and I'm amazed at how many people haven't a clue, and feel they have the right to use what they don't. They actually get mad at me, if I refuse to use a copyrighted image. It only takes one time in court, to become more aware and a lot poorer.


Good place to start is the basics.
http://copyright.gov/

 

[WeLoveLilo05]

If you are using an image that the author has waived any copyright claim to, you are all set. Many print shops won't know that and may not print it though.

Just because someone is famous doesn't give them a copyright/trademark to images legally taken of them as someone suggested. You can never claim the rights to an original work (such as a picture) someone else is the author to.

You can change a copyrighted imaged substantially, thus a derivative work, with no issue. Think the Obama Hope image. That was tricky because they just changed the color palate, but the idea is even a copyrighted image can be manipulated into a new "work" with no problems.

Thanks that was the biggie in question too!

 

[WeLoveLilo05]

ah, you know what, i'll just find something on ebay or etsy lol. Make my life easier, IDK how I'd get in touch with the people that trade their pics.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

It's sort of like having a picture taken by a professional photographer. Even if you purchase the picture from the photographer, you cannot take it to someplace like Walgreens and have it reproduced. They will not do it unless you have a release from the photographer. To do so, they could receive a $10,000 fine and lose their license to print photos. The rights to the actual photo still belong to the photographer. You just purchased a copy of it from him/her.

I have 2 instances where I have had my picture professionally taken and I have the rights--

One, I have the digitized image provided from the photographer.

The other--well...they gave me all the negatives, so that solves that problem.

However, in both cases--I purchased more than just the physical photograph.

 

[Ceila]

I have 2 instances where I have had my picture professionally taken and I have the rights--

One, I have the digitized image provided from the photographer.

The other--well...they gave me all the negatives, so that solves that problem.

However, in both cases--I purchased more than just the physical photograph.

Actually, the photographer probably still owns the copyright, even if they gave you permission to make copies (probably at an extra cost to you). Simply providing you with digital files or negatives doesn't automatically transfer ownership of the copyright, even if you are allowed to make copies.