Copyright release when painting a photo

[Arlene M. Knop]

I belong to a watercolor artists' group and the subject of painting from
someone else's photographs comes up frequently.

If I do such a painting, do I need a waiver from the photographer: a) if I
just keep the painting for myself, b) if I enter it in a contest, c) if I
want to put my painting on a web sight, d) if I want to reproduce my
painting?

How would I word the request for the photographer to sign? Wouldn't I own
the copyright of the painting?

Any help would be much appreciated.

Arlene

[Dale Austin]

Arlene:
Ah, a can of worms. You are talking about what I believe are known as
"derivative" works-which the original photographer does have a right to
control. The limits of "derivative" are usually settled in court on a
case-by-case basis, so there is no hard and fast rule as to how similar
your painting has to be in order to constitute a copyright infringement.
If you simply copy the work in a new medium, then you are in violation
of the photographer's copyright. Though as an artist, you might
disagree, as far as infringement goes, a paintbrush is every bit as much
a piece of reproduction technology as a scanner, photocopier, or
camera-it just has a much lower resolution. <g>

Now, obeying the eleventh commandment: "Thou shalt not get caught",
paint the thing for yourself, for your own amusement, and you might get
off on the "fair use" provisions of copyright. Contests, web sites, and
reproductions would be a BIG no-no however, for the right to be credited
and benefit from the act of creating that particular composition is the
photographers. Period.

Leaving aside the law (thank god), it wouldn't do your karma any harm to
check with the photographer anyway. A little (un)common courtesy goes a
long way. Most photographers I know are pretty reasonable folks, so
unless you are a big name and stand to make a tidy profit from the work
in question, they are unlikely to object.

Arlene M. Knop wrote:
>
> I belong to a watercolor artists' group and the subject of painting from
> someone else's photographs comes up frequently.
>
> If I do such a painting, do I need a waiver from the photographer:

Theoretically, always

>a) if I just keep the painting for myself,

Who would know?

>b) if I enter it in a contest,

Yes

>c) if I want to put my painting on a web sight,

Yes

>d) if I want to reproduce my painting?

Money involved-makes pursuing the violation profitable.

> How would I word the request for the photographer to sign?

I've never seen such a piece of paper, but I'm certain that a fairly
standard transfer of copyright contract specifying specific use(s) would
do the trick.

>Wouldn't I own the copyright of the painting?

Not if it was derivative-deciding this is what the courts are for

>
> Any help would be much appreciated.
>
> Arlene

Dale Austin

[Arlene M. Knop]

Thanks--I have passed on your information. I believe most painters
don't know that they are breaking copyright law when they do this and it
is so tempting to use a photo from a magazine or calendar. I use my own
photos to work from and others' only as references, such as what a bird
wing looks like, etc. Thanks for your input.

Arlene

Dale Austin (mrwi...@umich.edu) wrote:
: Arlene:

[dannyg1]

Arlene (and Dale),

> : Ah, a can of worms. You are talking about what I believe are known as
> : "derivative" works

There is case law on the books regarding this issue from the US Supreme Court.
The Defendant was Jeff Koons, who had made a 3d bronze sculpture from a postcard
photo. I'm sorry that know the photographer/plaintiff's name but I do remember
the case being heard around two years ago.

Koons lost and had to share the profit from the sale of the sculpture with the
photographer.

Danny Gonzalez

[Dale Austin]

Danny (and Arlene)
I recall (vaguely) a case that made the photographic press a few years
back, where a company (I think) hired a photographer to essentially
restage another photographers image. (They were too stingy to pay the
big name guy for the usage rights I think was the story) I remember a
pool shot of a swimsuit-clad brunette, shot mostly from above with the
pool water as a background. Side by side, the two images were not
exactly the same, but the pose, the type and color of the swimsuit, and
the coloring of the model/hairstyle were all just about the same. The
court ruled this was clearly an infingement, especially as it could be
demonstrated that the customer had first conatacted the original
photographer about the image. That kinda made protesting innocent intent
a problem. I'm not sure if there was an appeal, or how it came out. I
think it quietly went away when some cash changed hands.

Dale

[Mike Hutchinson]

In article <6bqi0n$50c$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>, Arlene M. Knop
<ak...@orion.it.luc.edu> writes

>I belong to a watercolor artists' group and the subject of painting from
>someone else's photographs comes up frequently.
>

>If I do such a painting, do I need a waiver from the photographer: a) if I
>just keep the painting for myself, b) if I enter it in a contest, c) if I
>want to put my painting on a web sight, d) if I want to reproduce my
>painting?
>
>How would I word the request for the photographer to sign? Wouldn't I own

>the copyright of the painting?
>

>Any help would be much appreciated.
>
>Arlene

I don't know what the law says (probably depends what country you're in)
but consider how you would feel if a photographer started selling
pictures of a painting you had done.

Mike
--
Mike Hutchinson

[Harris M. Miller II]

>>I belong to a watercolor artists' group and the subject of painting from
someone else's photographs comes up frequently.<<

Not in the order asked, but here goes:

>>Wouldn't I own the copyright of the painting?<<

Yes, but it is a derivative work that you can't exploit without the consent
of the copyright proprietor of the original work. By analogy, if you write
a screenplay based on _Catcher in the Rye_, you own the screenplay
copyright, but you can't exploit it publicly without Salinger's permission

>>If I do such a painting, do I need a waiver from the photographer: a) if
I
just keep the painting for myself<<

No, not if you don't publicly exploit the piece.

>>b) if I enter it in a contest<<

Depends on the contest.

>>c) if I want to put my painting on a web sight<<

Yes, unless the original is in the public domain or you can make a "fair
use" arguement (which I don't have time to address here).

>>d) if I want to reproduce my painting?<<

Same as "c)"

>>How would I word the request for the photographer to sign?<<

Contact an attorney. It depends on your use and what rights the
photographer is willing to grant/license. E.g., Will your painting be
reproduced on posters? Will you pay a fee or royalty? Will the
photographer want a credit? Will the license be for the life of the
copyright? Will the license be exclusive? Can you license derivative uses?

[SidG]

On 10 Feb 1998 21:49:11 GMT, ak...@orion.it.luc.edu (Arlene M. Knop)
wrote:

>I belong to a watercolor artists' group and the subject of painting from
>someone else's photographs comes up frequently.
>

>If I do such a painting, do I need a waiver from the photographer: a) if I

>just keep the painting for myself, b) if I enter it in a contest, c) if I
>want to put my painting on a web sight, d) if I want to reproduce my
>painting?
>
>How would I word the request for the photographer to sign? Wouldn't I own

>the copyright of the painting?
>

>Any help would be much appreciated.
>
>Arlene

Actually, a couple of years ago, someone won a Corel art contest with
a painting of an American Indian. Corel used the winning painting on
their ads and they and the painter ended up getting sued because the
painting was copied from a photograph. I believe Corel and/or the
artist lost the suit with considerable financial penalties.

Sharon

[Peter Chigmaroff]

SidG wrote:

At least $100,000 I believe.

Peter Chigmaroff

[Arlene M. Knop]

I want to thank all who offered comments and advice. I have saved the
posts and will consolidate them and pass them on to the watercolor
group, although in the past when I've given them copyright information
they do not reply to me. I guess they really don't want to hear it.
Perhaps there is more painting from others' photos than I thought.
Maybe I'm a little more sensitive since I work from my own photographs
and wouldn't want somebody else painting my "children". Their attitude
may not change until one of them has a painting photographed and
published without permission.

Thanks again. Maybe I'll dust off my trusty Minolta and stick with this
news group!

Arlene

Peter Chigmaroff (pc...@elitechsys.com) wrote: