Copyright question

Dalantech

My wife wants to set up a web site where she can display photos of used books that she wants to sell -but she doesn't want to sell photos of the books. Would that be acceptable, or would photographing a book cover and posting it violate copyright on the book? BTW: She buys and sells books here in Italy, and the volume is low (more of a hobby than a business).

Andy

Dalantech wrote:

My wife wants to set up a web site where she can display photos of used books that she wants to sell -but she doesn't want to sell photos of the books. Would that be acceptable, or would photographing a book cover and posting it violate copyright on the book? BTW: She buys and sells books here in Italy, and the volume is low (more of a hobby than a business).

I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice. But ...
Mark the galleries & photos as not-for-sale, and why not?

Dalantech

Andy wrote:

Mark the galleries & photos as not-for-sale, and why not?

cdhames

there's really no difference in the case of literary work. If it's under someone elses copyright, you should seek permission from that owner, be it individual or corporate, to display or resell that work. Generally, most people aren't going to mind you "displaying" their work as long as it's not a part of a for-profit campaign.

I would certainly take the suggestions above and seek legal advice before selling those copies publicly. Or you may find a none-too-carefully worded letter in your inbox stating a few immediate demands.

Goto the link below for information on copyright.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci

jev

You can sell used books and make pictures of those
Just don;t sell pictures itself

Look at amazon or ebay any other used/new book store
all of those would be out of business right now, if they could not photograph their merchandise and market it to sellers.

Same as you can make picture of your Canon 350D and use it for sale of you camera on ebay, but if you would like to sell a picture of canon 350D on ebay, that is compeltely different story

Dalantech

jev wrote:

You can sell used books and make pictures of those
Just don;t sell pictures itself

Look at amazon or ebay any other used/new book store
all of those would be out of business right now, if they could not photograph their merchandise and market it to sellers.

Same as you can make picture of your Canon 350D and use it for sale of you camera on ebay, but if you would like to sell a picture of canon 350D on ebay, that is compeltely different story

-but I asked just to make sure...

Dalantech

The Mrs. and I started the web site today -it's "beta" but I think it's looking pretty good so far :

http://juneross.smugmug.com/

In Italian.

JimM

jev wrote:

Same as you can make picture of your Canon 350D and use it for sale of you camera on ebay, but if you would like to sell a picture of canon 350D on ebay, that is compeltely different story

Why couldn't you sell a picture of the camera? Seems to me you could. Also, if the photo of a book was in an artistic fashion (because of the image, lighting, background, etc) I don't see why you couldn't sell the image of the book too.

Stustaff

JimM wrote:

Why couldn't you sell a picture of the camera? Seems to me you could. Also, if the photo of a book was in an artistic fashion (because of the image, lighting, background, etc) I don't see why you couldn't sell the image of the book too.

Have to agree, surely you could sell a piece of art! ie a picture of a camera.?

For example if I go to the florist and buy some flowers and take a photo of them on a IKEA table, I can sell that I dont need the florists or IKEA's permission.

look at all those photos/pictures of sports cars for sale out there.

ivar

Stustaff wrote:

Have to agree, surely you could sell a piece of art! ie a picture of a camera.?

For example if I go to the florist and buy some flowers and take a photo of them on a IKEA table, I can sell that I dont need the florists or IKEA's permission.

look at all those photos/pictures of sports cars for sale out there.

I think there might be a problem in the air, when the picture itself contains a logo or brand name (from the camera or table). I'm thinking you can't sell photos with those, but i'm not a legal expert.

Stustaff

ivar wrote:

I think there might be a problem in the air, when the picture itself contains a logo or brand name (from the camera or table). I'm thinking you can't sell photos with those, but i'm not a legal expert.

I think when the item has the logo on thats ok, for example a ferrari logo on the car your photographing. But if you created a poster and then took the actual lets say Ferrari logo from their site and branded your poster with it then that WOULD be a breach.

but to be fair i am certainly no expert!

mdraughn

Stustaff wrote:

I think when the item has the logo on thats ok, for example a ferrari logo on the car your photographing. But if you created a poster and then took the actual lets say Ferrari logo from their site and branded your poster with it then that WOULD be a breach.

I AM NOT A LAWYER, BUT...

I think there two issues here: First, does your work infringe Ferrari's copyright? For example, a poster-sized macro close-up of the logo would consist almost entirely of Ferrari's intellectual property. Also, some product designs are copyrighted, so a close-up of some of the car's design elements might also be an infringement.

It all depends on all the things copyright depends on. For example, a close-up of the logo would probably be legal to publish in a news article about the logo or more generally about Ferrari. If you wrote a book about Ferrari, you could probably use your photo in it. But...

The second issue is whether your work makes use of Ferrari's trademark. If your use of the Ferrari logo in a photo implies Ferrari is involved, or if you are using Ferrari's commercial reputation for your advantage, then you're in trouble. So if you want to put the Ferrari logo on the cover of your book about Ferrari, you might need permission, because the cover serves a much more commercial purpose than the contents.

Photography law is complicated because it includes copyright law, trademark law, privacy law, and libel law. In a tricky situation, you should consult a real lawyer who is familiar with photography law. Among other things, instead of stating vague principles like I do, he would be aware of the outcomes of actual court cases involving the issues that concern you. That's the gold standard of legal knowledge.

Meanwhile, it would be worth your while to check out Bert P. Krages's page on Photography and Art Law. He's a lawyer and a photographer, and I own a copy of his Legal Handbook for Photographers which is the best book I've seen on the subject.

Of course, all this is about US law only, and I'm not even a lawyer.