Re: copyright

I'm not a copyright attorney and I don't mean to
portray one on the web......but

I think that the infringement would occur if the
publisher photographed the drawings/renderings that
Christos and Jean-Claude made to raise money for the
project, used them but didn't get permission.

To be clearer, I go to a museum show of Cindy
Sherman's works. I take a photo of one of the images
cropping out everythng but the image area. I then
publish the image. If I hadn't gotten permission to
use the image from Cindy Sherman (or her reps), I
better get a superduper lawyer. That or win the
lottery to pay for the copyright infringement.

Stuart
 
--- Barry Kleider <bkleider@sihope.com> wrote:

> Gerry,
>
> It's not even a grey area. He's completely within
> his rights - as best I
> understand copyright law.
>
> For one thing, you're not looking at The Gates /per
> se/ - you're looking
> at */his photographs of The Gates/ *- a hugely
> important distinction.
> (Different medium, includes people, shows the site,
> etc.) All of which
> may have been intended in the Gates project, but are
> not a direct part
> of it in the same way they are part of his images.
> He would argue this
> is his unique take on what he saw on that afternoon.
>
> It's very different from making a bootleg copy of
> the Sponge Bob movie
> and showing it for $$$ in your living room. Reason
> being the Sponge Bob
> movie would be an exact dupe. And even if he were to
> insert his images
> into the Sponge Bob movie, it would likely be
> considered an infringement
> of fair use because he would be showing the movie in
> it's entirety
> rather than an excerpt.
>
> The difference between a newspaper and a magazine
> is not relevant -
> both are for profit. Tim would also say he is
> providing a news source
> for photographers. You can decide not to buy his
> magazine, and the
> advertisers can decide not to buy ads if they don't
> think it's a good
> investment.
>
> Most importantly, the images are his. He can print
> them where and when
> he wishes.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Barry
>
>
> Gerry Giliberti wrote:
>
> > You've asked a lot of questions and I'm not sure
> if I can answer them
> > all. The photos are the publishers (Tim Anderson).
> He shot them. You
> > can view the photos on the website cameraarts.com.
> He has copy written
> > the images so they are his.
> >
> > The reason I questioned why he printed them
> without permission (and
> > that is the key here) was that I was under the
> impression that this
> > was a work of art be it public or not, in the same
> sense as, for
> > example, a movie. You can use it for you own
> enjoyment but if you
> > invite people over your house and play it and
> charge them money,
> > that's copyright infringement. (His publication is
> not a newspaper.
> > He makes money when people come to view
> photographic art and use his
> > advertisers.) I was just wondering how this type
> of art can be
> > photographed and used to generate income without
> the artist's
> > permission. This Gates thing seems like it falls
> into a gray area
> > where copyright is concerned.
> >
> > Gerry G
> >
> > "If you can't imitate him, don't copy him." Yogi
> Berra
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > *From:* Barry Kleider
> [mailto:bkleider@sihope.com]
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 29, 2005 9:49 AM
> > *To:* GGiliberti@controlotron.com
> > *Subject:* offlist copyright
> >
> > Gerry,
> > Could you provide a few more details for us?
> >
> > For instance, I'd like to see the images in
> question.
> >
> > I'd also like to know:
> > Does he own the images?
> > (If so, why are you questioning the decision
> to print them?)
> > Does publication also include attribution?
> > Who is the photographer, and how does he/she
> feel about this
> > situation?
> >
> > Tim sounds a bit cold about the matter, but
> he's essentially right:
> > if he owns the image (assuming no one else
> holds the copyrights)
> > if it was shot on public land
> > if the image is used as part of a news item
> >
> > it would likely be considered "fair use."
> > He's also right in saying that it sometimes
> gets dicey.
> >
> > It would be courtesy for Tim to include the
> photographer's name on
> > publication.
> >
> > (I used to work for a newspaper, and we ran
> into this sort of
> > thing sometimes. If you need to talk to a
> lawyer about it, I can
> > give you the name of the guy we used. Mark
> Anfinson represented
> > the Minnesota Newspaper Association for a very
> long time and knows
> > media law. I haven't talked to him in several
> years, but feel free
> > to drop my name. Mark is a great guy and he
> can help you sort it
> > out fairly quickly. His number is
> 612.827.5611)
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Barry Kleider
> >
> >
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Wed Mar 30 06:54:40 2005