Legal Artwork question for all our resident attorneys 1 1

[the blob]

4 hours ago, kav said:

Would you get a cease and desist first or could they go straight to a suit and prove damages or income you garnered?

They could sue right away. And if the image is registered with the copyright office they can go after you for statory damages, which last I looked were 10-150k per infringement as well as attorney fees and costs. Otherwise they are limited to profits, etc.

I had a case where the infringer only made about $1500 in profit and likely less, but I think the court awarded $450k in statutory damages and about $250k in legal fees.

Edited October 7, 2018 by the blob

[the blob]

Neal Adams owns the copyright in his derivative work, but both he and DC could sue you for mass producing items. I suspect, but do not know, that artists are generally allowed to create one of a kind works, but if Neal wanted to do a 1000 copy limited Batman print he probably needs to get a license from dc if they haven't already granted one.

Edited October 7, 2018 by the blob

[kav]

8 minutes ago, the blob said:

They could sue right away. And if the image is registered with the copyright office they can go after you for statory damages, which last I looked were 10-150k per infringement as well as attorney fees and costs. Otherwise they are limited to profits, etc.

I had a case where the infringer only made about $1500 in profit and likely less, but I think the court awarded $450k in statutory damages and about $250k in legal fees.

what about cases like using a celebrity for a character in a comic like that dr strange book with amy grant-I believe that was fair use but portraying her as a witch they got money for that.  You can use a celebrity in a comic right like superman vs muhammad ali i cant imagine they got permission from the hundreds of famous people on the cover also mad magazine or political cartoonists do this constantly.

[the blob]

Just now, kav said:

what about cases like using a celebrity for a character in a comic like that dr strange book with amy grant-I believe that was fair use but portraying her as a witch they got money for that.  You can use a celebrity in a comic right like superman vs muhammad ali i cant imagine they got permission from the hundreds of famous people on the cover also mad magazine or political cartoonists do this constantly.

Fair use. The boundaries of fair use are not perfectly defined. Wasn't the problem that they copied an iconic image of her rather than just coming up with their own? I can't remember. Also, remember, image rights are not copyright. Image rights go state by state.

[kav]

3 minutes ago, the blob said:

Fair use. The boundaries of fair use are not perfectly defined. Wasn't the problem that they copied an iconic image of her rather than just coming up with their own? I can't remember. Also, remember, image rights are not copyright. Image rights go state by state.

no it was the witchcraft angle.  what is an image right?  I remember one case a guy copied a tiger woods photo exactly and painted it and sold posters.  Court ruled in his favor.  The photo was copyright TW but not the painting.

[the blob]

5 minutes ago, kav said:

no it was the witchcraft angle.  what is an image right?  I remember one case a guy copied a tiger woods photo exactly and painted it and sold posters.  Court ruled in his favor.  The photo was copyright TW but not the painting.

Actually, the photo image was likely owned by someone else. A right to one's image is separate and depending on the state there may be a claim if the use of your image is done in a way that incorrectly tarnished your reputation, which was Grant's angle. Nothing to do with the OP.

[kav]

5 minutes ago, the blob said:

Actually, the photo image was likely owned by someone else. A right to one's image is separate and depending on the state there may be a claim if the use of your image is done in a way that incorrectly tarnished your reputation, which was Grant's angle. Nothing to do with the OP.

I love the board lawyers.  its better than calling Saul.

[topofthetotem]

9 minutes ago, kav said:

I love the board lawyers.  its better than calling Saul.

Well you definitely won’t get blowed up. 

[the blob]

Tiger claimed he had a trademark in his likeness. The court disagreed and exempted his right to his image from transformative 1st amendment protected artistic expression. Some states specifically have an exemption for fine art. In reading the case summary I saw nothing about this guy painting over someone else's photo. That was the Obama poster?

[kav]

2 minutes ago, the blob said:

Tiger claimed he had a trademark in his likeness. The court disagreed and exempted his right to his image from transformative 1st amendment protected artistic expression. Some states specifically have an exemption for fine art. In reading the case summary I saw nothing about this guy painting over someone else's photo. That was the Obama poster?

no he didnt paint over the photo he just I guess gridded the image then painted it.

Edited October 7, 2018 by kav

[topofthetotem]

And I think but could be wrong the person that took the photo of the Obama poster has the rights not the poster’s creator, if that makes any sense. 

[kav]

Batman is a licensed character and protected but Tiger Woods is not a licensed character right?

[kav]

Also you could draw and sell batman shirts all day long if its satire or parody like batman smoking a joint or something right?

[HENRYSPENCER]

So if I paid an artist to commission a logo for my business that I would subsequently use on t-shirts and stickers?  I probably would have to work with an artist who needs the money and would create some character or monsters that are generic and never been done before?

[kav]

12 minutes ago, HENRYSPENCER said:

So if I paid an artist to commission a logo for my business that I would subsequently use on t-shirts and stickers?  I probably would have to work with an artist who needs the money and would create some character or monsters that are generic and never been done before?

just have whatever monster you like but have him smoking a joint!

[ADAMANTIUM]

14 minutes ago, HENRYSPENCER said:

So if I paid an artist to commission a logo for my business that I would subsequently use on t-shirts and stickers?  I probably would have to work with an artist who needs the money and would create some character or monsters that are generic and never been done before?

I wonder if it would depend on the business.... a comic store could have superheroes. 

LCS near me uses regular heroes on their van, but on their Facebook it is a superman/shazaam type generic....

But no you couldn't use "the" Batman, as you would patent your logo, and the copyrights belong to dc.

My dad patented or copyrighted his logo for a greeting card... he had an artist rendition, AND when going to get the "rights" to it they had to make sure that there was nothing else like it out there

Edited October 8, 2018 by ADAMANTIUM
And

[kav]

3 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

I wonder if it would depend on the business.... a comic store could have superheroes. 

LCS near me uses regular heroes on their van, but on their Facebook it is a superman/shazaam type generic....

But no you couldn't use "the" Batman, as you would patent your logo, and the copyrights belong to dc.

My dad patented or copyrighted his logo for a greeting card... he had an artist rendition, AND when going to get the "rights" to it they had to make sure that there was nothing else like it out there

Just have a character that looks like batman but call him night bat!!!

[ADAMANTIUM]

Just now, kav said:

Just have a character that looks like batman but call him night bat!!!

+1 

You can have different variations for sure, as with a picture there is no way to put an exact description for copyright. A picture is worth a 1,000 words and they wanted him to describe in the patent in about 10 words....

[ADAMANTIUM]

It's worth noting that patent is for mechanical? And copyright is for written, which includes pictures?

So i maybe should have stuck with the word copyright throughout my last couple of posts....  

 

[kav]

12 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

It's worth noting that patent is for mechanical? And copyright is for written, which includes pictures?

So i maybe should have stuck with the word copyright throughout my last couple of posts....  

 

It amuses me when amateur artists put a little c next to everything like someone is gonna steal it.  Or like they need to do that.  Once you draw something, its copyrighted.  My personal policy on all the artwork I have done and its hundreds of thousands is-STEAL IT.  PLS STEAL IT.  I DONT CARE.  MAKE MONEY OFF IT-WHATEVER.