Copyrights....
torags
Registered Users Posts: 4,615 Major grins
Specifically from newspapers...
"As the Supreme Court stated in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., "copying a news broadcast may have a stronger claim to fair use than copying a motion picture." Why? Because copying from informational works such as scholarly, scientific, or NEWS JOURNALS encourages the free spread of ideas and encourages the creation of new scientific or educational works, all of which benefit the public."
So i saw an image I liked from a local newspaper advertising wine country...
I liked it and thought it would be good for my hotel job; so I researched it and to my surprise discovered the above...
I liked the angle of the image the photog took. But it was on 2 pages & would require some work...
That said; the permissions of the model were covered by the newspaper... and the newspaper needn't give authorization according to Sony vs Universal...
I was home free... Here's the image...
Home free?? nah, it was rejected....
Comments
Great work on pulling a two-page photo spread into a single image!
Too bad it was rejected. ☹️
El Gato
www.globaltrekk-photos.com
Please, everyone, produce and use only from your own original works. Blatant copyright infringement is not a joke and can wind you up in jail with large fines.
Most people don't understand copyright laws, so if you have to use another photographer's works, check with a copyright attorney about how to do it legally. Don't try to use a regular lawyer; most of them don't have copyright-specific experience and you can still wind up in trouble.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
While I agree that most people don't understand copyright laws, including me; my use was NOT infringement...
Hence the posted court reference...
I suggest you read the decision by the Supreme Court of the United States indicated above and if you feel uncomfortable - don't do it...
By the way I have experience in trademarks and patents...
Are you suggesting a "Fair Use" defense?
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I don't know what the term fair use means nor it's defense (& I don't want to know)...
The Supreme Court decision mentions exceptions to the copyright laws... I'll rely on that...
Let's back up a bit.
You said, "As the Supreme Court stated in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., "copying a news broadcast may have a stronger claim to fair use than copying a motion picture."", and then you said, "Because copying from informational works such as scholarly, scientific, or NEWS JOURNALS encourages the free spread of ideas and encourages the creation of new scientific or educational works, all of which benefit the public."
... and you mentioned both quotes in the same paragraph, correct?
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I'm not getting involved in a pissing contest with you...
Read it and draw your own conclusions; I couldn't care less...
Hmmm, OK. We can also see that you intended your copy for "my hotel job", which puts it into a "commercial" application for legal purposes.
Indeed, since you listed the Supreme Court Case, "Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.", and you quoted, "... stronger claim to fair use ...", you admit this is a "Fair Use Defense", otherwise why are you quoting a Fair Use - Supreme Court Case?
If you had read the entirety of, "Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, (1984)", you might have noted the following, which applies to your Commercial application of acquired art:
From Page 464 U. S. 451, "Thus, although every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the copyright, noncommercial uses are a different matter."
You can see that, as of 1984 the Supreme Court ruled that it is unlawful to use other's art for gain without permission and/or compensation to the author of the art, and to do so without attribution is another infraction, unless you have explicit permission from the owner, usually with additional compensation. I will remind you that violation of copyright law is subject to:
THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT OF 1998
Page 7, last paragraph:
"In addition, it is a criminal offense to violate section 1201 or 1202 wilfully and
for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain. Under section 1204
penalties range up to a $500,000 fine or up to five years imprisonment for a first
offense, and up to a $1,000,000 fine or up to 10 years imprisonment for subsequent
offenses."
Get your own PDF copy of the DMCA of 1998:
https://copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums