Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Copyright issues regarding forum attachments

Author
Message
Jeff Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 03:18
Link
There 2 differences in the legal concept of "public domain" between the US vs. UK/Canada/Australia directly related to a totally non-commercial WIP I was planning to post in a few weeks.

1 - public domain status of slavishly accurate photos or scans of public domain 2D (e.g. public domain paintings that are centuries - or even millenia - old.) These are splattered all over Wikipedia for download, and that site's justification discussion is at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.

2 - public domain status of compilations of facts/data compiled with no artistic creativity (e.g. alphabetical phone directory with an automatic selection process). Discussion at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_v._Rural

Both discussions indicate national legal differences. Both categories would be public domain in the US but not necessarily so in UK/Canada/Australia.

My WIP involves a skysphere/planetarium which accurately represents about 9,000 stars in their correct relative positions, which might be useful for educational purposes or a kitbash for the Extends system. Naturally, I download a mass of celestial coordinates from a database which is there for that purpose. If the compilation of coordinates were copyrightable as such, my texture of the skysphere would be an unauthorized derivative work under US copyright law, but it is not.

To spice up the presentation I likewise toss in some ancient topical artwork - all scans or photos of ancient paintings or publications (e.g. of constellations) or slavish reproductions of them. It is my nature to cite - visibly - authorship of everything and to avoid any implication that I myself have drawn anything at all. Not a plagiarism issue, but a copyright issue. In the US I would not have a problem.

I note from another recent thread in this forum that the TGC server is in the US, so I have been assuming that TGC would apply US standards to copyright/publication issues on works posted on the forum.

By way of background, I have been a copyright infringement lawyer in the US for 31 years, and so I am probably as sensitive to copyright infringement issues as the rest of the community combined (excluding those who have have been personally sued). From my own personal liability standpoint, I have no hesitation whatsover spreading my project up for grabs on any US server or distibuting it on any US streetcorner, and if anyone gave me heat I'd have them for breakfast in court. However, I'm no international expert by any means.

I don't feel up to continuing dressing up the WIP if there is a likelihood of someone wetting their pants and axing it from the DBP forum over fear of TGC liability. I saw a thread in the FPSC section where the Mod apparently killed a post attachment because the posting forum member appeared to be passing off a 3d model as his own when it appeared likely that it was a presumably copyrighted 3D model owned by someone else. That was a good move on the Mod's part, incidentally, under the circumstances.

Where do you think TGC stands on these issues?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 04:25
Link
TGCs stances generally is, you're responsible for whatever you post in all legal senses; their AUP and T&C seperates them from all liabilities.

If something is a big breach of these then moderators will step in, but usually things are on you're own head.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
dark coder
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Oct 2002
Location: Japan
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 07:12
Link
I thought anything beyond this planet when taken a photo of is public domain and cannot be owned by anyone unless it's heavily modified, unless I'm mistaken.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 09:09
Link
The AUP makes you responsible for your own material. But if TGC became aware of a copyrighted resource, I'm sure it would be removed accordingly.

But it's a tough one because you are indeed on the fringes of the law.



Back to top
Profile PM Email
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 09:23
Link
Quote: "I thought anything beyond this planet when taken a photo of is public domain and cannot be owned by anyone unless it's heavily modified, unless I'm mistaken."


If someone can patent sections of the human genome, they are most likely able to patent star maps unfortunately.

Ben Stein's Christmas Thoughts
Back to top
Profile PM Website
APEXnow
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Apr 2003
Location: On a park bench
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 10:40 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 10:42
Link
Jeff,

I was rather interested to read your post because it does flag the issue and necessity to be careful when using media, and where it's obtained from. A few months ago, I was asked to do an Asteroids clone for a job opportunity, proof of practice etc etc. The backdrops to the game (only two), I managed to find using google image search, and they worked great. It was good to find that the original creator of the images was contactable, and I was able to get his permission to use the backdrops before I distributed the game online.

I obviously don't profit from the game as it's just a free download, but it does flag the importance of obtaining permission or using copyrighted media and the implications of it, even if it is freely accessable online.

Paul.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 11:02
Link
Apex, you were very fortunate. I wanted to use a music track in a game, and contacting the owner was impossible. I found his email address, MySpace page and physical address, but he responded to none of them.



Back to top
Profile PM Email
Jeff Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 12:27
Link
Well, the only way I could contact Da Vinci or William Blake would be if I run into them in the afterlife. The issue is simply this: if have have an ancient drawing I can run it through the scanner and go hog wild with it. If I don't but someone else does and he runs it through the scanner and slaps it on the web, in the US the image would not be protected by copyright but in the UK it might. A copyright held not by the actual author of the scanned work, but by the person who pushed the "start" button on the scanner.

Batvink raises the example of music, which I forgot to mention. My approach to finding music would be the same as my approach to everything else: don't reinvent the wheel. Here is Wikipedia's public domain music site:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sound/list

Here is where it gets tricky: There are from one to three copyrights in a music track. The music itself (sequences of notes, etc.) copyright owned (initially) by the composer, the lyrics (frequently seperately authored and owned by someone other than the composer), and the sound recording itself (the artistic work of the performer). Now the Mars section of Gustav Holst's "The Planets" fairly down on Wikipedia list makes a great background for a battle scene in a video game. The music is clearly public domain by virtue of its age (sounds modern but amazingly published prior to the advent of mechanized warfare). However, the sound recording would be old enought to be in the public domain by age alone. Wikipedia lists it because it is a US government recording, and most US government works are free pickings. If they were listing the same ancient musical work performed by a contemporary privately operated orchestra, I would be wary.

US Government sites are where I am getting most of the celestial media, for that matter: NASA, USGS,USNO. That is because it is free.

Did I say free? What was I thinking? I paid $23,000 in US federal income tax last year. I paid for those photos!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 12:35
Link
They still hold a legal copyright to the images though, and without permission even though you may have "paid" for the right to the images and information; it does not constitute as permission to use them.

I think an ironic fact is that for education purposes you're not technically allowed to provide images you've obtained unless you have permission from the original author. If the author is no longer alive then it is whoever holds the present copyright to them. This said if there is no copyright watermark on media/information then legally it's free game.

So if you don't want to loose you're rights to compensation you feel owed, then make sure you do watermark anything you produce as proof that it is yours.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 12:49
Link
A few snippets that may help...

Copyright lasts 50 years. Even if the author dies, he still owns the copyright through his beneficiaries.

In the UK at least, you can quote up to 10% of a book in other publications, as long as the sources are acknowledged.

Quote: "if there is no copyright watermark on media/information then legally it's free game."

I don't know the finer details, but that is plain wrong! You don't even have to include a copyright statement for something to be covered by the copyright law.

For someone to claim copyright on a copy of an original piece of art, such as Da Vinci's last supper for example, then I would imagine that it would need to be a derivative of the original. So simply scanning the image would not make you a copyright holder. But if you then retouched it and removed all the blemishes and cracks, yo could probably claim to own that derivative of the image. The bit I miss here, of course, is whether you're actually allowed to copy the image in the first place!



Back to top
Profile PM Email
Jeff Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 12:54
Link
The US government generally abandons copyright protection in governement works BECAUSE the people have paid for them in that sense. Regarding space-based images, for example, some of the NASA sites explicitly state that the photos are not copyrighted, and request that when you publish the images you provide a particular credit identifying NASA as the source (not owner) of the image. In reviewing many government sites you find a common theme: don't publish the images in a context that gives rise to an implication that the government agency is sponsoring whatever you are up to. That is a distinctly different liablity than copyright infringement, but still a potential liability.

Regarding Dark Coder's assumption that space-based photos are public domain PER SE : I don't think this is true in all cases. The US government photos generally are - and there are plenty of them. Other governments may take a different position, and some space-based satellites are launched by governments but owned privately, and for that matter some governents are allowing wealthy private individuals to go along for a space ride. Those individuals - not on the governments payroll - might bring along their own camera and take some shots, and those might be copyrighted.

Regarding Raven's comments on watermarks: they are not legally required for copyright protection. They function to help prevent copyright infringement. Some watermarks on digital graphic media are totally invisible, incidentally.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Jeff Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 13:08
Link
Batvink:

I was thinking more of Da Vinci's notebooks. The problem with "The Last Supper" is that its painted on a wall and can't be scanned, but rather photographed, and photography often involves an artistic skill. That's what the first link I provided debates: when all the effort goes into taking the photo as an exact reproduction rather than an impression.

Regarding your question: you can photograph (copy) an ancient painting without committing copyright infringement if you are in the right location to do. Prohibitions would arise from other laws: you might be committing trespass, or if access to the painting is conditioned on a rule prohibiting photography, which you would be breaching a contract.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CattleRustler
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Aug 2003
Location: case modding at overclock.net
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 13:32 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 13:33
Link
Quote: "I paid $23,000 in US federal income tax last year."

when you have time, watch the movie linked in my sig. I am not saying to discuss it here, just watch it. You can email me with your thoughts if you like.

Michael Moore needs film making lessons from Aaron Russo: America: Freedom To Fascism
Back to top
Profile PM
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 14:18
Link
Quote: "I paid $23,000 in US federal income tax last year."


Sweet, finally someone who pays in more than me. I'm not the biggest sucker afterall

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Cash Curtis II
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Apr 2005
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 14:34
Link
I know that you are approaching infringement when you use someones photograph or scan of another piece of art. In the case of The Last Supper, there are so many different copies of it that nobody would think twice if they saw it in something that you create. It simply wouldn't be economical or practical to pursue such an infringement unless you made a ton of money off of it, and they could absolutely prove that it was theirs. I wouldn't worry about such a case.


Come see the WIP!
Back to top
Profile PM
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 16:08
Link
Maybe a more simple example would be better. For example, you can grab artwork and resources from the internet for free. A good example is abandonware, discussed elsewhere. Just because you put it in your game, I would imagine it doesn't give you any copyright entitlement. In fact you often see quotes like "All images are copyright of their respective owners".

So I think my point is this: You may have resources, free, royalty-free or purchased. The bottom line is that you must respect the rights of the owner, whatever they may be. It could be contractually or legally binding. The owner, through copyright law, contract clauses or otherwise may pursue you however they choose to. The deal is between you, the publisher and them, the owner.



Back to top
Profile PM Email
Jeff Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 16:39
Link
I can, and will, end up making a WIP free of any potential legal hassles, since I perceive some difficulty in resolving the national differences in approach I flagged at the beginning of the thread. If I can't pull that off having professionally advised others how to do it for three decades then it's time to hang up the old jock strap.

But for discussion purposes I am still curious as to the following:
If TGC were advised by their own independent counsel that a particular graphic photo was indisputedly public domain in the US, but the British Museum was claiming - correctly - that it was their copyrighted work in the UK and that they did not permit display of it, would TGC - a UK citizen - permit it on TGC's pages on a US server? Maybe Philip can weigh in - he seems always on top on UK legal issues.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 16:40
Link
Quote: "I don't know the finer details, but that is plain wrong! You don't even have to include a copyright statement for something to be covered by the copyright law."


The laws on copyright itself are very patchy at best, there are many loopholes; what's more is court cases that require evidence past what is being disputed can be dragged out and become very costly beyond what the argument is worth. Many large companies can afford such legal battles, only individuals can't.
With a watermark this forces people to ask for permission to use, it also proves the source.

It's about the only *real* protect you can have for your work.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
GatorHex
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Apr 2005
Location: Gunchester, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 17:00 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 17:01
Link
I suspect the way the law works is that you have to prove you lost money because of it.

If your work was distributed freely and you were creditted for making it, you would find it hard to bring a damages claim.

Sites that distribute free/demo software would use this defense if anyone said, "oy! you copied my work without asking me!"

http://www.KumKie.com http://bulldog.servegame.com
Back to top
Profile PM Website
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 17:34
Link
Regarding the files being hosted on anyone's forum server, it's highly likely anyone would err on the side of caution. If the owner of the material makes an approach, the first step is to take it down; then you can argue whether or not it can be put back up again.



Back to top
Profile PM Email
Cash Curtis II
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Apr 2005
Location: Corpus Christi Texas
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 17:49
Link
You aren't going to get sued unless you're making money. The worst that will happen is you'll be told to stop using it, which will only happen occasionally. In my opinion, well worth the benefits of using said media. It's not like you would be taking credit for it.


Come see the WIP!
Back to top
Profile PM
Zappo
Valued Member
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2004
Location: In the post
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 18:00 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 18:00
Link
The problem is that if you do use material which you don't own, and don't have permission to use, you can be sued - whether or not you are making money from it. Plus its morally wrong. There is a good chance that they won't sue, but they have the right to. They could argue that they directly or indirectly make money from it and you have taken earnings away from them, or that your use of the material could damage their image/reputation in some way. For example, many companies are very strict on the use of their logo even if its used in a good context.

If they do decide to come down hard you can't even recall all the copies people downloaded.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
APEXnow
Retired Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Apr 2003
Location: On a park bench
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 18:16 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 18:16
Link
I've seen a number of forums (googled) which actually used my name, and a few of the pictures from my site regarding the importer tool which I never knew about. Now, although I don't have any issue in people actually pulling images from my site, hell if I did, I wouldn't put them on there. But it does show that people will take the images and use them for their own purposes without even an email.

Paul.

[EDIT] typo

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 18:55
Link
Lets get this out of the way first: IANAL, and I am only commenting on UK law.

Secondly, copyright = the right to copy. Only the holder of the copyright has this right, or those he specifically authorises to do so. If you copy material that belongs to someone else, whether or not you make money, or whether the copyright holder loses money, you are infringing the copyright and you can be sued. It is your responsibility to obtain permission to use the copyrighted material.

Next, as soon as you create something (code, a model, images etc) you automatically own the copyright. The media/code does *not* need to be marked in any way for you to gain this copyright. However, it certainly makes sense to obtain proof that it belongs to you in case of infringement.

Summary of UK copyright law can be found here: http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/uk_law_summary, and more detailed pages are available on the same site.

For free Plug-ins and source code
http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
New Utility plugins collection
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-18 04:48:33
Your offset time is: 2024-11-18 04:48:33