Re: Well...Part 2 1/2...

Posted by Michaelson from leospace047.utsi.edu on July 03, 2000 at 16:03:36:

In Reply to: Re: Well...Part 2... posted by Indiana Jimmie on June 29, 2000 at 23:11:03:

: Hello Michaelson and Sas!!
: You are ALL THREE actually right.
: I do not know a whole lot about it ( my experience is along the lines of Michaelson's....I used to work in film production )...there is an "article" in the US known as the Berne Act...it basically goes on about using copyrighted materials, and how you are allowed if there are changes in the material. That's how most of these 'bootleggers' can get away with selling 'unedited' versions of films here, since they technically exist in a form that was never copyrighted here.
: HOWEVER....these US copyrights sometimes only exist IN the US, and if he's in, say, Germany, they may not apply. Also, the point about using someone's image is true...under US law. Again, I'm no expert or lawyer, but I remember a story a few years ago about Sean Connery not allowing his image to be used for the Highlander card game, hence no Ramirez card. (this may have changed since then)
: Also, This particular painting carries not only OBVIOUS representations of Harrison, et.al., but are in fact reproductions of other already officially liscenced artwork simply re-arranged to construct a new overall image.
: BUT the end product CAN be considered intellectual property, so a strong case could probably be made for distribution, if not for profit.
: Again, before you attack me like sharks , :), let me stress that my experience is strictly movie related, and I am not a lawyer, nor have I studied law.....I used to have to carry release forms also...what a pain!!
: Hope I helped, and not gummed things up worse.

: Besides, the painting was pretty cool.

: Indiana Jimmie

I agree with Jimmie, as I am stating US law. Once you leave the US controlled areas, all bets are off. And yes, US lawyers will indeed agree with me, as occasionally these waters are tested in court, and currently the US court system is taking a dim view of folks using others image without signed permission of that individual, whether it's a photograph or a drawing. But there is so much grey area in the copyright law it's hard to state exactly WHAT the law is from day to day. Today you may be on solid legal ground, tomorrow the courts may look at it differently and change their minds. That's why I always carried and had appearence releases signed by ANYONE who walked through my frame. Better safe than sorry when dealing with the crazy court system. Regards. Michaelson

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : Hello Michaelson and Sas!!
: : You are ALL THREE actually right.
: : I do not know a whole lot about it ( my experience is along the lines of Michaelson's....I used to work in film production )...there is an "article" in the US known as the Berne Act...it basically goes on about using copyrighted materials, and how you are allowed if there are changes in the material. That's how most of these 'bootleggers' can get away with selling 'unedited' versions of films here, since they technically exist in a form that was never copyrighted here.
: : HOWEVER....these US copyrights sometimes only exist IN the US, and if he's in, say, Germany, they may not apply. Also, the point about using someone's image is true...under US law. Again, I'm no expert or lawyer, but I remember a story a few years ago about Sean Connery not allowing his image to be used for the Highlander card game, hence no Ramirez card. (this may have changed since then)
: : Also, This particular painting carries not only OBVIOUS representations of Harrison, et.al., but are in fact reproductions of other already officially liscenced artwork simply re-arranged to construct a new overall image.
: : BUT the end product CAN be considered intellectual property, so a strong case could probably be made for distribution, if not for profit.
: : Again, before you attack me like sharks , :), let me stress that my experience is strictly movie related, and I am not a lawyer, nor have I studied law.....I used to have to carry release forms also...what a pain!!
: : Hope I helped, and not gummed things up worse.

: : Besides, the painting was pretty cool.

: : Indiana Jimmie

: I agree with Jimmie, as I am stating US law. Once you leave the US controlled areas, all bets are off. And yes, US lawyers will indeed agree with me, as occasionally these waters are tested in court, and currently the US court system is taking a dim view of folks using others image without signed permission of that individual, whether it's a photograph or a drawing. But there is so much grey area in the copyright law it's hard to state exactly WHAT the law is from day to day. Today you may be on solid legal ground, tomorrow the courts may look at it differently and change their minds. That's why I always carried and had appearence releases signed by ANYONE who walked through my frame. Better safe than sorry when dealing with the crazy court system. Regards. Michaelson

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]