Is this illegal?

[cbones84]

Hey,

I had a business idea that is similar to tattooing. It is not done on people or anything living for that matter, no needle or machinery is even needed. My work is permanent though, so it is the same concept. Most of the work is my own but I do use other pictures that are not my own. Is this illegal to do so? I ask because I see many tattoo artists doing pictures that are not thiers and I have never heard of a problem in the line of business for anything like that. I've taken alot of time looking into getting my business going but I can't seem to find closure on this topic. Help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks alot

 

[The Occultist]

Since you're considering a business venture, the best thing you can do is, as opposed to accepting advice from strangers on the internet, sit down with an attorney versed in such law so he can see exactly what you're talking about and advise you accordingly.

 

[cbones84]

That would be my next step. I've read about gaining permission to pictures, but was confused on how tattoo artist's didn't need to. I've seen hundreds of New York Yankee, Che Guevarro, Toronto Maple Leafs tattoo's that have all been copywrited for protection but yet still used in this way.

 

[Zigner]

That would be my next step. I've read about gaining permission to pictures, but was confused on how tattoo artist's didn't need to. I've seen hundreds of New York Yankee, Che Guevarro, Toronto Maple Leafs tattoo's that have all been copywrited for protection but yet still used in this way.

Who says they don't need to?

 

[cbones84]

I didn't mean to make assumptions. But I have seen customers bring in a piece of paper from a magazine with them and ask the artist for this on them. I frequent shops alot as I do admire the work these artists do. But about 3 months ago I accompanied my friend who went in and asked for a New York Yankee tattoo. All the artist had done was print it up and performed his service. This got me thinking about my current situation, I don't wanna go forth with my ideas to have them blown up in my face. This is not the only time, I was also in attendance to see a lady get the Mona Lisa on her back. The artist just re-scaled the picture to be accurate for her back size.

Thanks

 

[Zigner]

I didn't mean to make assumptions. But I have seen customers bring in a piece of paper from a magazine with them and ask the artist for this on them. I frequent shops alot as I do admire the work these artists do. But about 3 months ago I accompanied my friend who went in and asked for a New York Yankee tattoo. All the artist had done was print it up and performed his service. This got me thinking about my current situation, I don't wanna go forth with my ideas to have them blown up in my face. This is not the only time, I was also in attendance to see a lady get the Mona Lisa on her back. The artist just re-scaled the picture to be accurate for her back size.

Thanks

People speed "all the time"...doesn't make it legal.
People steal - doesn't make it legal.
People commit murder - doesn't make it legal.
People use file-sharing sites to download copyrighted items - doesn't make it legal.

etc etc etc

 

[cbones84]

Well put

Thanks

 

[Zigner]

Well put

Thanks

Thank YOU for being understanding and not jumping down my throat for pointing things out It's refreshing

 

[cbones84]

No prob, your the one giving me the advice.

If I were to use a 2 or more pics that are not mine in the same project would this make it my own? The pics would not be alterted from there original, but would include other pics in the project on the same canvas. Would this be considered altering the photo?

 

[quincy]

You posted the same original question over in the Sports/Arts/Entertainment section of this forum, too. . . .

To answer your latest question, probably not. Putting two or more copyrighted works together into one work would not generally make the resulting work your own. Instead, it would make your resulting work an infringement of two or more copyrighted works.

If you wish to use someone else's copyrighted work, the U.S. Copyright Office recommends that you get that person's permission prior to use. It is a risk to do otherwise. What a fair use of another's copyrighted material is, is not easy to determine. The factors used to weigh fair use are ultimately weighed by a court, when a copyright owner objects to another's use of their material and sues for infringement.

The Occulist suggested you speak with an attorney about your proposed business uses of other's copyrighted material prior to using any. That advice is wise.

You may wish, by the way, to review several lawsuits brought against the artist Jeff Koons. He has lost more infringement lawsuits than he has won, however his use of another's work was considered a fair use by the courts in Blanch v Koons, 2006. Google his name and you can check the cases out.

 

[cbones84]

Yes I did, I didn't know where to be getting the right advice and which heading I should post it under.

I apologize in advance if I become annoying, I just wanna be clear and tie up any loose ends before I move forth with the necessary steps.

If I take an image re-draw it in a stencil form on a different medium, than color it in my own style, would this be wrong as well?

If the I use a part of a picture and not the whole thing with the same method as mentioned above (this is the method used for all of my projects) would this be wrong?

I'd like to advise that this is my first time trying my hand at business and I am only 25 years of age, I truly don't mean to be elementary or annoying, I am just under the influence that there are many fine lines in copy-writes and I wanna make sure I'm explaining myself in correctly.

All the advice has been great and I appreciate it. Any more would greatly help. I am going at this alone

 

[quincy]

You are not being annoying. It is the wise person who seeks advice on a project before starting the project.

You are right that there are many areas of the copyright law that are fuzzy, and no area is fuzzier than what is fair use of another's copyrighted work. That is why I suggested you look over the Koons' lawsuits, as they go over what is looked at by a court when determining fair use.

But there is no clear "yes this is fair" and "no this is not fair" answer here. Fair use is determined BY a court, AFTER a lawsuit has been filed against a user of another's work. This means that you really won't know for SURE if your use of another's work is fair or not until you have been sued over your use.

Your example, by the way, of re-drawing an image in stencil form and recreating it in a different medium, could still infringe on the rights of the original artist. For an example of using another's work in a different medium, check out the Koons' lawsuit over his use of another's copyrighted photograph when he created a sculpture (Rogers v Koons).

It is really recommended that you get a copyright owner's permission to use any copyrighted work as an element in your own work, to avoid all possibility of an infringement action, or create your own original work. But if you are intent on using another's work without acquiring permission first, then you should at the very least have an IP attorney review your plans prior to implementing them. The attorney can give you a better idea of what risks you face with your work, and how much money you should set aside for an eventual infringement lawsuit, should one be filed against you.

Good luck.

 

[justalayman]

=cbones84;2496007]Y

If I take an image re-draw it in a stencil form on a different medium, than color it in my own style, would this be wrong as well?

If I understood what was stated by the most knowing divgradcurl (very few all knowing folks and as smart as divgradcurl is, I do not believe even he would consider himself to be "all" knowing), this would absolutely be violating the copyrights. The discussion was centered around a person that was basically drawing copies of pictures of animal photographs and even that was considered to violate copyrights.

If the I use a part of a picture and not the whole thing with the same method as mentioned above (this is the method used for all of my projects) would this be wrong?

I would suspect even this is illegal.

I'd like to advise that this is my first time trying my hand at business and I am only 25 years of age, I truly don't mean to be elementary or annoying, I am just under the influence that there are many fine lines in copy-writes and I wanna make sure I'm explaining myself in correctly.

the lines aren't so fine as they can be fuzzy and that is where the confusion lies.

I do not know if he will respond or not but you might try PM'ing a poster that goes by the name of divgradcurl. He is kind of the resident guru on this subject. You would be well served by his input.

 

[quincy]

Uh, justalayman, although I do not dispute in any way that divgradcurl is the "resident guru" in this section, I want to make it clear to our poster here that others (The Occulist and FlyingRon to name two) are familiar with both trademark and copyright laws and that I, although admittedly concentrating in the area of defamation law, am not exactly a legal idiot.

From this distance, and without seeing the works in question, even an IP attorney like divgradcurl will not be able to give a definitive answer to cbones' questions.

 

[justalayman]

Uh, justalayman, although I do not dispute in any way that divgradcurl is the "resident guru" in this section, I want to make it clear to our poster here that others (The Occulist and FlyingRon to name two) are familiar with both trademark and copyright laws and that I, although admittedly concentrating in the area of defamation law, am not exactly a legal idiot.

From this distance, and without seeing the works in question, even an IP attorney like divgradcurl will not be able to give a definitive answer to cbones' questions.

didn't mean to offend. and there is no definitive answer much of the time. I did not suggest there was. In fact, I even alluded to that with the "fuzzy line" as opposed to a bright line.

and the comment of "most knowing" was not to infer others knew less; I simply did not want to state "all" knowing.

I was just trying to get the OP all the info he could and divgradcurl is very to the point and factual. I figured it might help the OP.