Image copyright question
- Started
- Last post
- 7 Responses
- fingercore
For a project a client has requested that we use photos gathered from various magazine ads and modify them in at least 3 ways, because according to them, that is the minimum adjustments needed before we can use em. For example, for photos of people, changing the color of shirts, pants, hair, etc.
Keep in mind, our project will be published.
I think this is pretty much bullshit, but I was wondering if anyone had any info on the laws regarding this.
Thanks.
- jox0
Um, nuh-uh. There's no such thing as "modify your stolen stuff using these simple steps and you won't get sued".
- mg330
jox, to some degree, I think there is.
I'll look it up in a textbook tonight if I can find it. I majored in Advertising in college and for some reasons it strikes a bell that if you manipulate an image in the public domain to a certain percentage (want to say it's 7%) it's okay to use it.
Who determines what percentage of an image's manipulation is that percentage acceptable is anyone's guess.I'll look it up.
- jox0
I know that, I've read about that too but I'm pretty sure that only covers graphics, and not photography - and especially not with people's faces on it.
- tymeframe0
I've heard rumors of changing 70%? I stay away from it as much as possible.
Else, i'd have the client put something in writing stating if they get busted you won't be held accountable.
- mg330
Can't you just slap a black bar across their eyes?
- fingercore0
Yeah, I wanted to go with the black-bar idea..haha.
I'm sure my company won't be held responsible as the client repeatedly assured us that what we did was fine. It may still be changed, but I don't care.
Def sounds like a load of shit to me though.
- Dolan0
There is no percentage rule. It is a case by case basis based on "fair use" which has well-codified exemptions. Read the last sentence of the excerpt to your company and client.
From Stanford Law:
The fair use statute requires the courts to consider the following questions in deciding this issue:
Is it a competitive use? (In other words, if the use potentially affects the sales of the copied material, it's usually not fair.)
How much material was taken compared to the entire work of which the material was a part? (The more someone takes, the less likely it is that the use is fair.)
How was the material used? Is it a transformative use? (If the material was used to help create something new it is more likely to be considered a fair use that if it is merely copied verbatim into another work. Criticism, comment, news reporting, research, scholarship and non-profit educational uses are most likely to be judged fair uses. Uses motivated primarily by a desire for a commercial gain are less likely to be fair use).
As a general rule, if you are using a small portion of somebody else's work in a non-competitive way and the purpose for your use is to benefit the public, you're on pretty safe ground. On the other hand, if you take large portions of someone else's expression for your own purely commercial reasons, the rule usually won't apply.