Jump to content

All Rights Reserved


Mario Pende
 Share

Recommended Posts

If I model by looking at some image (bed,chair...) thats already someones product, and use that model in my work (to earn money), am I violanting any rights of the creator?

Note, there isnt any 3d model available of that product that I can use, and Im not modeling according any official dimensions, its more like "eye" modeling, you know according to your feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If that was the case, nobody would be allowed to paint a still life or take a photograph.

 

No matter how detailed or realistic, you're only creating a graphical representation of an object so it doesn't violate copyright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think that it's risky pool. even if its not copyrighted i personally believe thats its not ethical - even if its legal. As i've discussed in similar posts, i've no problom with "interpreting" - or even recreating with some variations - someone elses work, but a straight forward copy.... forget about it.

 

back to a previous argument... if someone took and published a picture of a building/lobby/flower arrangement, and you need that picture, arrange it and go take it yourself. if you want to draw or model that picture - completely different story, but once again, an outright copy - forget about it

 

now im going to ramble....

 

i guess if you found a picture with a portion that suited well as the base for a material, i've no problom.

 

i think if you found a picture that you wanted to use as the setting for a scene, i may have a problom with that.

 

i guess the capacity in wich the picture is used would play a large part in my decision. what if i rendered a kitchen without a table, and you liked my kitchen render - modeled a table for it and then posted my kitchen model with your table on your website as your work? - lame

 

Personally, i often hunt the internet looking for images for insperation or even for a base for materials etc... . I have no problom using them because im drastically/radically altering the state of the image - beyond any sort of recognition - for my poersonal use. i guess after that sort of manipulation you could hardly call someone elses artwork intact.

 

ie... if i find a photographedf scene with a nice tree... i clip the tree and use it in my model. But what if the main subject of the photograph is the tree? am i dangerously close to unethically using someone elses images?

 

i think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can take a magazine cover and paste it on the front of a magazine model. You are not claiming the cover to be your work and you are, again, just graphically representing a real world object. It is a background object in a render, nothing more.

 

You could in theory run into difficulties if you are deemed to be using a particular brand to sell something but really, the likelihood of Time magazine suing you for having one of their covers on a table in a lounge to make the apartment more attractive to buyers is pretty negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

y not ring around a few publishers and ask? if your renders are going to be used a lot in advertising and such, then its basically free advertising for the magazine.

 

but as marek has said, it could be dodgy.

 

y not quickly make your own covers? there are loads to stock royalty free websites with some great images.

 

personally i dont use images i find by searching the web directly in my work. sure i print them out, and use them as referances, but never as direct content. you cant be too careful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have no problom taking a magazine cover and mapping it to a rectangle for use as a magazine in the model. i mean, if you were to stage a photograph of a waiting room, wouldn't you grab some "peoples" and "newsweeks" and through them on the table? In these cases you are not representing the artwork of the time magazine cover as your artwork and i think that is an point. I dont think 3d models are much different than photographs in terms of whats ethical.... take someones artwork - put it in your model, and represent it as artwork and your ok, as in a poster. I mean, you are clearly not trying to take credit for piece if you represent it for what it is... make any sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you were to stage a photograph of a waiting room, wouldn't you grab some "peoples" and "newsweeks" and through them on the table? In these cases you are not representing the artwork of the time magazine cover as your artwork and i think that is an point. I dont think 3d models are much different than photographs in terms of whats ethical....

 

I can't remember precisely but I think in the UK that copyright violation is caused by "passing off" someone elses creation as your own or another example would be using something without a license say a developer building a house without the architects permission to use the design or someone using pirate software.

 

More of an issue might be infringment of a tradmark, but I doubt that a magazine would count whereas a statue of Mickey mouse with a bloodied chainsaw might...unless of course it was art/parody. Wasn't there a case a few years back where the makers of Barbie tried to sue Aqua because Barbie Girl made barbie out to be a bit of a slag? "you can kiss me there, undress me everywhere..." or something along those lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as artwork goes:

There have definitley been arch viz firms contacted by places like art.com to cease and desist using their 'web surfed' images in renderings. It's just that nobody will own up to it publicly. If you are working on a high profile piece, you had better get written permission from the artist or artist's rep first.

 

Most developers/architects use contract pieces for large public spaces and it is not that difficult to get a release. Just make sure you specify what size/dpi you plan on using as well as how it fits within the larger production.

If you are working on smaller residential typw work, check out the royalty free collections instead.

 

Technically, if you ask Coca-Cola for permission to use their soda can label in an animation - you will be denied by their legal dept. but tons of people do it without problems because it isn't worth it to Coke to pursue it.

The law is pretty black and white but the enforcement is definitley grey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any and all likenesses of a trademark are protected.

 

But again, it is rarely worth their time to enforce unless it is viewed as damaging to the product in some way.

For instance, stocking a rendering of a bar with scanned in labels of actual bottles and displaying that rendering in a conference room for a design review would not be worthy of a phone call. Showing an animation of the same bar with specific brands of liquor bottles being broken and used as projectiles to cause carnage worthy of a Samuel Jackson movie that gets picked up by a traveling film festival and 10 seconds on MTV would be highly likely to bring down the full wrath of a crack legal team - especially if it was titled something like 'Stoli packaging causes horrid death animation'

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

LOLOL I wonder which are the 'originals' there and which are 'enhanced' :)

 

Ok to answer your question we have to discuss what is 'Fair Use'? In most instances that means if a copyrighted work is used for 'news' purposes, educational and social commentary then it is allowed. This is why you see trademarks and logos used in editorial illustration without consequences because it is eitehr newsworthy or it is making a social commentary. This is also why things can be made fun of even if they are corporate symbols and products as long as there is satire or parody.

 

 

The gray area comes in when you start to do 'artwork' based on a existing work. This will be so called 'derivatives' and this is not always easy to define and would always depend on case to case basis depends on execution and 'end use'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Depends. For a big production kind of animation such as finding nemo, yeah you have to get the rights but for a small animation for a single client I think one might be able to use any sound.

 

Then If that small animation gets nominated for an award of some kind one would generally put in some credits to whomever is involved, and that means acknowledging the sound as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends. For a big production kind of animation such as finding nemo, yeah you have to get the rights but for a small animation for a single client I think one might be able to use any sound.

 

Then If that small animation gets nominated for an award of some kind one would generally put in some credits to whomever is involved, and that means acknowledging the sound as well

 

I doubt very much that simply adding a credit for the music will make it ok to copy it and use it in an animation. The music industry is really going after people copying music and that has to include using it in your soundtrack. If you have a client then you must be making money from the work so your pockets will be just that little bit deeper and better to prosecute. Basically, if you don't have a licnece to use the music in your work then you are infringing copyright. Its a straight copy rather than creating an image or representation of something as was the case in the original post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...