Copyright and free images

M
Posted By
Marquee
May 1, 2007
Views
649
Replies
8
Status
Closed
Yet another question – this time with regard to legal use of various images.
It seems I can’t just photoshop any image "willy-nilly" with a view to sharing said adjusted image on the ‘net. Is this correct? I guess it doesn’t matter what I do on my home computer, as I’m not sharing the image (although this may well be a grey area, it’s not what I’m concerned with at this point). What is illegal in the PRC or New Zealand is not relevant specifically. It is the "big picture", from a legal standpoint. For example, worth1000.com may ask you to photoshop any celebrity in any number of ways. So, I need to know if I can just grab a picture off any old website (particularly a well known image, as opposed, but not limited to, an image that is site specific) and photoshop it and then repost it in a worth1000.com’s competition or anywhere else, for that matter?
I’m not interested in the laws of individual nations. What may be copyright in PRC isn’t what I’m concerned with.
If, for example, I want to photoshop an image of Condoleeza and then post it on the net, do I need to get permission for use of said image? I’m struggling to find obviously "free to use as you wish" type images. Part of me thinks if I change an image enough that it becomes irrelevant to the original provider of the image, and that may well be true but then there’s possibley a privacy issue. That is, a "celebrities" right to not have their image posted on the net. Once it is up on the ‘net, is it fair game? That is, is it fair enough that I do with it as I see fit and then post my results? Considering
http://www.seanbaby.com/news/fatsuit.htm
and one (as an example) particular woman whose image she did not give permission for the webmaster to use and make all manner of comment on. Yet, after many years (at least five, IIRC), this woman’s image and consequent complaints are still available for anyone to access. Apologies if this upsets anyone. I’m just trying to accurately demonstrate my query.

Thanks,
+Marquee+

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

J
jaSPAMc
May 1, 2007
On Tue, 01 May 2007 23:01:28 +1200, Marquee found
these unused words floating about:

Yet another question – this time with regard to legal use of various images.
It seems I can’t just photoshop any image "willy-nilly" with a view to sharing said adjusted image on the ‘net. Is this correct?

Correct.

I guess it doesn’t matter what I do on my home computer, as I’m not sharing the image (although this may well be a grey area, it’s not what I’m concerned with at this point). What is illegal in the PRC or New Zealand is not relevant specifically. It is the "big picture", from a legal standpoint. For example, worth1000.com may ask you to photoshop any celebrity in any number of ways. So, I need to know if I can just grab a picture off any old website (particularly a well known image, as opposed, but not limited to, an image that is site specific) and photoshop it and then repost it in a worth1000.com’s competition or anywhere else, for that matter?
I’m not interested in the laws of individual nations. What may be copyright in PRC isn’t what I’m concerned with.
If, for example, I want to photoshop an image of Condoleeza and then post it on the net, do I need to get permission for use of said image?

Yes.

I’m struggling to find obviously "free to use as you wish" type images. Part of me thinks if I change an image enough that it becomes irrelevant to the original provider of the image, and that may well be true but then there’s possibley a privacy issue. That is, a "celebrities" right to not have their image posted on the net. Once it is up on the ‘net, is it fair game?

No. Copyrights apply to images on the net.

That is, is it fair enough
that I do with it as I see fit and then post my results? Considering
http://www.seanbaby.com/news/fatsuit.htm
and one (as an example) particular woman whose image she did not give permission for the webmaster to use and make all manner of comment on. Yet, after many years (at least five, IIRC), this woman’s image and consequent complaints are still available for anyone to access. Apologies if this upsets anyone. I’m just trying to accurately demonstrate my query.

Free Speech and Image Copyright are entirely different issues.

Thanks,
+Marquee+
J
Jon
May 2, 2007
If there are, for arguments sake, a billion images on the web (there’s probably far more) then how can it be possible to track down a particular image that is being used without permission?
For instance, I have numerous images on Flickr. Surely it’s impossible for me(or anyone) to check that one of my images has been ‘lifted’ and used somewhere in the big wide world, whether it be on the net or a magazine or whatever. OK, if you’re a famous person then images may be easier to track but for the vast majority of images ‘out there’ surely the law is unenforcable and as such it’s a free for all.
J
jaSPAMc
May 2, 2007
On Wed, 02 May 2007 19:44:01 +0100, Jon found these unused words floating about:

If there are, for arguments sake, a billion images on the web (there’s probably far more) then how can it be possible to track down a particular image that is being used without permission?
For instance, I have numerous images on Flickr. Surely it’s impossible for me(or anyone) to check that one of my images has been ‘lifted’ and used somewhere in the big wide world, whether it be on the net or a magazine or whatever. OK, if you’re a famous person then images may be easier to track but for the vast majority of images ‘out there’ surely the law is unenforcable and as such it’s a free for all.

If you enter an empty house at night with a mask on and gloves you can steal anything you wish … still doesn’t make it proper behaviour!

IF the image, in addition to copyright, has been registered, then hefty damages CAN be achieved in court. Only have to print out the web page as ‘proof’.

The real query is whether or not the image is being used in a ‘commercial’ manner. OTW, it’d not be worth the effort (and return) – in most cases!
J
Jon
May 2, 2007
Yes, well, I’m not advocating theft at all since I have, as stated, many pictures ‘out there’ but my point is that the copyright law on pictures is basically unenforceable for the vast majority. I have had several people ask me for permission to use my pictures but there’s no way of telling how many are used without permission. With the huge quantities of picture publishing media available all over the world, what would be the point in registering them? Until someone can assure me of a foolproof method of checking for copyright protection then it’s either don’t publish your pictures or alternatively, publish them and accept that you may well get ripped off.

Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 19:44:01 +0100, Jon found these unused words floating about:

If there are, for arguments sake, a billion images on the web (there’s probably far more) then how can it be possible to track down a particular image that is being used without permission?
For instance, I have numerous images on Flickr. Surely it’s impossible for me(or anyone) to check that one of my images has been ‘lifted’ and used somewhere in the big wide world, whether it be on the net or a magazine or whatever. OK, if you’re a famous person then images may be easier to track but for the vast majority of images ‘out there’ surely the law is unenforcable and as such it’s a free for all.

If you enter an empty house at night with a mask on and gloves you can steal anything you wish … still doesn’t make it proper behaviour!
IF the image, in addition to copyright, has been registered, then hefty damages CAN be achieved in court. Only have to print out the web page as ‘proof’.

The real query is whether or not the image is being used in a ‘commercial’ manner. OTW, it’d not be worth the effort (and return) – in most cases!
T
Tacit
May 6, 2007
In article <4638f7da$0$8740$>,
Jon wrote:

Yes, well, I’m not advocating theft at all since I have, as stated, many pictures ‘out there’ but my point is that the copyright law on pictures is basically unenforceable for the vast majority. I have had several people ask me for permission to use my pictures but there’s no way of telling how many are used without permission.

There are, however, ways to tell if they’re using the images and reposting them on the Web. Several tools now exist which make a digital "fingerprint" of an image and then scan the Web looking for images with a similar "fingerprint;" these tools can be quite effective at locating copied images on the Web.


Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
M
Marquee
May 14, 2007
On Tue, 01 May 2007 07:46:13 -0700, Sir F. A. Rien
wrote:

On Tue, 01 May 2007 23:01:28 +1200, Marquee found
these unused words floating about:

Yet another question – this time with regard to legal use of various images.
It seems I can’t just photoshop any image "willy-nilly" with a view to sharing said adjusted image on the ‘net. Is this correct?

Correct.

I guess it doesn’t matter what I do on my home computer, as I’m not sharing the image (although this may well be a grey area, it’s not what I’m concerned with at this point). What is illegal in the PRC or New Zealand is not relevant specifically. It is the "big picture", from a legal standpoint. For example, worth1000.com may ask you to photoshop any celebrity in any number of ways. So, I need to know if I can just grab a picture off any old website (particularly a well known image, as opposed, but not limited to, an image that is site specific) and photoshop it and then repost it in a worth1000.com’s competition or anywhere else, for that matter?
I’m not interested in the laws of individual nations. What may be copyright in PRC isn’t what I’m concerned with.
If, for example, I want to photoshop an image of Condoleeza and then post it on the net, do I need to get permission for use of said image?

Yes.

I’m struggling to find obviously "free to use as you wish" type images. Part of me thinks if I change an image enough that it becomes irrelevant to the original provider of the image, and that may well be true but then there’s possibley a privacy issue. That is, a "celebrities" right to not have their image posted on the net. Once it is up on the ‘net, is it fair game?

No. Copyrights apply to images on the net.

That is, is it fair enough
that I do with it as I see fit and then post my results? Considering
http://www.seanbaby.com/news/fatsuit.htm
and one (as an example) particular woman whose image she did not give permission for the webmaster to use and make all manner of comment on. Yet, after many years (at least five, IIRC), this woman’s image and consequent complaints are still available for anyone to access. Apologies if this upsets anyone. I’m just trying to accurately demonstrate my query.

Free Speech and Image Copyright are entirely different issues.
I can appreciate that they’re different issues – I was specifically referring to the pics that Miguel had taken from Deidra-babe’s site for his site, amongst around twenty-thirty odd webpages of pics he’s used from various sites and websources.

Moving along:

Do you, or anyone know what the situation is with regard to old paintings or images where the artist is long dead. For example, could I use ‘The Last Supper’ in a worth1000.com competition (s’pose I should ask them but it’s more of an example than actual case) or, photoshop it and use it on the web without fear of breaking the law? How about images of celebrities? For example (again), turning Jacque Chirac into doubting Thomas?
=Marquee=

PS: Thanks Sir and others for your feedback and opinion.
T
tuckermor
May 14, 2007
For example, could
I use ‘The Last Supper’ in a worth1000.com competition

If it is your own image (e.g., if you paint a copy, or photograph the original painting) you can. But images in books, on postcards, etc., are copyrighted by someone else, often the museum that owns the painting. You can probably find plenty of copies of the more famous Last Suppers on the web that are being used without permission, but that doesn’t make it right.


"Marquee" wrote in message
On Tue, 01 May 2007 07:46:13 -0700, Sir F. A. Rien
wrote:

On Tue, 01 May 2007 23:01:28 +1200, Marquee
found
these unused words floating about:

Yet another question – this time with regard to legal use of various images.
It seems I can’t just photoshop any image "willy-nilly" with a view to sharing said adjusted image on the ‘net. Is this correct?

Correct.

I guess it doesn’t matter what I do on my home computer, as I’m not sharing the image (although this may well be a grey area, it’s not what I’m concerned with at this point). What is illegal in the PRC or New Zealand is not relevant specifically. It is the "big picture", from a legal standpoint. For example, worth1000.com may ask you to photoshop any celebrity in any number of ways. So, I need to know if I can just grab a picture off any old website (particularly a well known image, as opposed, but not limited to, an image that is site specific) and photoshop it and then repost it in a worth1000.com’s competition or anywhere else, for that matter?
I’m not interested in the laws of individual nations. What may be copyright in PRC isn’t what I’m concerned with.
If, for example, I want to photoshop an image of Condoleeza and then post it on the net, do I need to get permission for use of said image?

Yes.

I’m struggling to find obviously "free to use as you wish" type images. Part of me thinks if I change an image enough that it becomes irrelevant to the original provider of the image, and that may well be true but then there’s possibley a privacy issue. That is, a "celebrities" right to not have their image posted on the net. Once it is up on the ‘net, is it fair game?

No. Copyrights apply to images on the net.

That is, is it fair enough
that I do with it as I see fit and then post my results? Considering
http://www.seanbaby.com/news/fatsuit.htm
and one (as an example) particular woman whose image she did not give permission for the webmaster to use and make all manner of comment on. Yet, after many years (at least five, IIRC), this woman’s image and consequent complaints are still available for anyone to access. Apologies if this upsets anyone. I’m just trying to accurately demonstrate my query.

Free Speech and Image Copyright are entirely different issues.
I can appreciate that they’re different issues – I was specifically referring to the pics that Miguel had taken from Deidra-babe’s site for his site, amongst around twenty-thirty odd webpages of pics he’s used from various sites and websources.

Moving along:

Do you, or anyone know what the situation is with regard to old paintings or images where the artist is long dead. For example, could I use ‘The Last Supper’ in a worth1000.com competition (s’pose I should ask them but it’s more of an example than actual case) or, photoshop it and use it on the web without fear of breaking the law? How about images of celebrities? For example (again), turning Jacque Chirac into doubting Thomas?
=Marquee=

PS: Thanks Sir and others for your feedback and opinion.
K
KatWoman
May 14, 2007
"tuckermor" wrote in message
For example, could
I use ‘The Last Supper’ in a worth1000.com competition

If it is your own image (e.g., if you paint a copy, or photograph the original painting) you can. But images in books, on postcards, etc., are copyrighted by someone else, often the museum that owns the painting. You can probably find plenty of copies of the more famous Last Suppers on the web that are being used without permission, but that doesn’t make it right.


"Marquee" wrote in message
On Tue, 01 May 2007 07:46:13 -0700, Sir F. A. Rien
wrote:

On Tue, 01 May 2007 23:01:28 +1200, Marquee
found
these unused words floating about:

Yet another question – this time with regard to legal use of various images.
It seems I can’t just photoshop any image "willy-nilly" with a view to sharing said adjusted image on the ‘net. Is this correct?

Correct.

I guess it doesn’t matter what I do on my home computer, as I’m not sharing the image (although this may well be a grey area, it’s not what I’m concerned with at this point). What is illegal in the PRC or New Zealand is not relevant specifically. It is the "big picture", from a legal standpoint. For example, worth1000.com may ask you to photoshop any celebrity in any number of ways. So, I need to know if I can just grab a picture off any old website (particularly a well known image, as opposed, but not limited to, an image that is site specific) and photoshop it and then repost it in a worth1000.com’s competition or anywhere else, for that matter?
I’m not interested in the laws of individual nations. What may be copyright in PRC isn’t what I’m concerned with.
If, for example, I want to photoshop an image of Condoleeza and then post it on the net, do I need to get permission for use of said image?

Yes.

I’m struggling to find obviously "free to use as you wish" type images. Part of me thinks if I change an image enough that it becomes irrelevant to the original provider of the image, and that may well be true but then there’s possibley a privacy issue. That is, a "celebrities" right to not have their image posted on the net. Once it is up on the ‘net, is it fair game?

No. Copyrights apply to images on the net.

That is, is it fair enough
that I do with it as I see fit and then post my results? Considering
http://www.seanbaby.com/news/fatsuit.htm
and one (as an example) particular woman whose image she did not give permission for the webmaster to use and make all manner of comment on. Yet, after many years (at least five, IIRC), this woman’s image and consequent complaints are still available for anyone to access. Apologies if this upsets anyone. I’m just trying to accurately demonstrate my query.

Free Speech and Image Copyright are entirely different issues.
I can appreciate that they’re different issues – I was specifically referring to the pics that Miguel had taken from Deidra-babe’s site for his site, amongst around twenty-thirty odd webpages of pics he’s used from various sites and websources.

Moving along:

Do you, or anyone know what the situation is with regard to old paintings or images where the artist is long dead. For example, could I use ‘The Last Supper’ in a worth1000.com competition (s’pose I should ask them but it’s more of an example than actual case) or, photoshop it and use it on the web without fear of breaking the law? How about images of celebrities? For example (again), turning Jacque Chirac into doubting Thomas?
=Marquee=

PS: Thanks Sir and others for your feedback and opinion.

there is a thing called being in the public domain
often celebrity images may be used without permission
there is a statute of limitations on copyright, so old paintings may not qualify, you think Michelangelo is going to sue you?
you can sometimes use parodies of works legally
(lots of precedent law on that)

http://paintedcows.com/tm_copy.html

there are a lot of laws that differ by country
digital files and intellectual property are under assault the behind you protect may be your own
just because you can take something doesn’t mean it’s free or OK to do so the current "honor" system only works if people are honorable and maybe most are but….

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections