Altered Images & Copyright

[MasterKaos]

Ok guys I know this will probably open up a can of worms, but I'd love to hear other web developers opinions on this as well as any experiences they'd like to share:

Is the following scenario a copyright infringement?
I download an image from a site that allows images to be copied for personal use but not for commercial use. I then alter the image in photoshop. Altering may be anything from just changing the colours to incorporating the original image as a small element in a large collage. I then put the altered image on a commerical web site, as a decoration only.

My understanding of copyright regarding altered images is that altering an image requires copying the original, so even if the finished product is not protected by the original authors copyright, the act of copying the original is. But if copying the original for personal use is OK, then my personal use is creating a new image based on the original, then that new image is my property and I can do with it whatever i want. Right or wrong?

Also, what is the common interpretation of "commerical use"? If I am selling an image and asking for money for it then i'm sure that's commercial use, but if i put it on a commercial site purely as a decoration, is THAT commercial use also?

I know there's probably no right or wrong answer, and I'm sure there's one heck of a grey area here, but I'd like to know what the common consenus on this sort of thing is.

----------------------------------------
The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development time.

 

[ChrisHunt]

It all depends on the exact terms of use of the original image. If it says "must not be used for commercial purposes" then taking it, shrinking it, colouring it green and putting it in a (commercially-used) collage counts as "using it" just as much as displaying it in its original form (IMO anyway).

If the originator had the foresight to use one of the Creative Commons licences you can work out exactly what you are, and aren't allowed to do at

http://creativecommons.org

.

-- Chris Hunt

http://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk

http://www.napitalia.org.uk

http://www.leicesteryha.org.uk

 

[tviman]

To answer the second part of your question, "commercial use" generally means that if you're a business, you're a commercial entity and thus, can't use the image. If you're just posting a "personal" web page, then you can use it.

U.S. Copyright laws are pretty specific but are subject to a judge's interpretation of what you're doing with the copyrighted material. In your case, if the image was copyrighted, then you would be in violation UNLESS you were using the copyrighted material in direct critisism or parady of the material. But this should be VERY evident or a judge may rule against you.

There's always a better way. The fun is trying to find it!

 

[BabyJeffy]

Very interesting points you raise!

Personally, I would have thought that if you modified the image 'significantly' (such that the original and the final product side by side bore little resemblance to one another) then you could call it your own (and use it as you wished).

The pivotal part being that it bore little resemblance.

Other examples of this exist in the type setting/font building industries. At what point does one copyrighted font differ from another (free of copyright) font? If they bore little resemblance then I would say they would not be infringing one another.

You know... the solution to this would be to contact the original owner and ask for a release (or whatever it's called) granted for your use. I usually grant the right to anyone who bothers to approach me about using one of my images.

Thanks for making me think about the problem at least!

Jeff

 

[tviman]

Jeff,

You are correct about the "bore little resemblance" part. I doubt that few "originators" look that hard for potential "copies" of their work. Further, as long as there was no significant loss of revenue by the originator then there would be litte reason to claim copyright infringement.

However, the bottom line is that it's still in the hands of the copyright court and judge (no juries here) to make the final determination. I've seen it go both ways with no rhyme or reason to the outcome.

As you state, the best way to avoid problems is to ask the owner. I've found that a majority of them are flattered and will even offer assistance to help you make those "significant" changes.

There's always a better way. The fun is trying to find it!