A copyright question
muller252
Posts: 42
Hi,
If I sell an image using products from daz studio, and some of my own, how do I protect the image? Is it intellectual copyright? I realise there is copyright on the actual model be the creator, but how do I protect my idea?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Moved from Commercial Products into the Commons because it is a query, not a Commercial product for sale.
You'd need to check the law where you live, but the copyright on the image would normally be yours - in some places you may need to register that copyright in order to pursue damages in case of infringement, but as I understand it you still own the rights to the image without registration even where that's the case.
A fast, yet not as secure, method to protect your images, is to upload them in a site like deviantart, that embrace creative commons licencing, and set your accepted terms of image usage. Do that BEFORE you post the image anywhere else. Creative Commons can actually be your legal shielding in protecting your copyright, when time is of the essense.
Not sure what you mean by "idea"? If you create an image of two people playing ball, it doesn't mean that the actual concept of two people and a ball belongs to you. Anyone can do that.
Your picture belongs to you - you don't have to do anything for that. All art is automatically protected by copyright unless otherwise stated by the creator or copyright holder.
Except in China, where they don't adhere to international copyright laws.
This is incorrect. Creative Commons is a form of license, and falls under normal copyright law. I'm not a lawyers but here's the gist of my understanding of how copyright law works. Most of this is governed by international treaties so my understanding is that this is fairly consistent but make sure to check up on local laws before acting.
Usually copyright is automatic, you get it as soon as you create the work. You can't copyright an idea but you any creation based on that idea can be copyrighted. Or in other words, there's no such thing as somebody "stealing your idea".
If you haven't registered your copyright then all you can claim are actual damages if somebody infringes your copyright. This means that in most cases you'll be lucky to get awarded a licensing fee for the image. Or in other words, good luck even getting a lawyer to take the case.
Registering your copyright is not required but makes you eligible for statutory damages if your copyright is infringed. If memory serves, this goes into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single violation and I believe legal fees are covered as well. Or in other words, if you've registered your copyright you stand a strong chance of having a lawyer take on the case on spec since he knows he's going to get paid and you will more than likely be able to work out a settlement with the infringer.
Creative Commons is simply a licensing mechanism, you are simply stating that you are granting use of the work under certain terms, which you are granting automatically to everyone instead of negotiating on the spot with somebody. It doesn't impart any more or less protections than what I've outlined above, and if somebody infringes on your work (such as using an image in a commercial way when you've only granted non-commercial use) then you fall back on normal copyright protections.
In other news Russia is about to ratify its accession to WTO full membership, although the exact date is unknown as of yet but it should be a matter of days now. Both countries clearly have a rather up-hill battle to teach their citizens to respect IP property rights, but it seems the days of piracy as we know it are finally numbered.
In other news Russia is about to ratify its accession to WTO full membership, although the exact date is unknown as of yet but it should be a matter of days now. Both countries clearly have a rather up-hill battle to teach their citizens to respect IP property rights, but it seems the days of piracy as we know it are finally numbered.
OK thanks for the clarification, I admit that my knowledge on the subject may be a little out of date. It's just that a few years back, some of my photos were being circulated on Chinese websites, and I was told back then that there was nothing I could do, because copyright laws do not exist in China - or didn't at the time.
I'm not in the US (Canada here) but my understanding is that this is a misconception, copyright is granted on the creation of the image, registration just massively changes what you're entitled to in terms of an infringement. As far as I know, that concept also carries over to the various international treaties on copyright so it's worthwhile to check out what registration does and does not grant you in your own country. My understanding is that in Canada it's a similar situation where you get copyright automatically but registering entitles you to statutory damages if there is an infringement and that's a huge difference in terms of your ability to get money out of people who infringe.
Getting back to the original question, in terms of the creation of an image. You'd have to read the terms and conditions on any items used in your picture but my guess would be that any items should at least allow for non-commercial use as otherwise there's not really much value in buying the item if you can't use any of the images you created. But, you should double check if there are any restrictions on things like commercial use and/or repackaging depending on what you're going to use the stuff for. For instance, creating a commercial image or video might be okay but repackaging the product into a game might require additional licensing.
But, assuming you at least have the rights to create the image and share it, you should be fine for getting your own copyright based on images created with those items.
I created a video and put it on youtube. The video contains renders of 3D art that I found on the net. This was actually what got me interested in 3D art. From what I am reading, if I understand it correctly, that I am going to have to take that video off of Youtube. Is this true?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQp4dxypb5g&feature=g-upl
Link to video.
It could have a render that someone from this site created. I really do not know.
There is only 1 correct answer to the question: contact a lawyer/attorney versed on Intellectual Property Law. It'll cost a little but it may be worth it if you ever have to defend yourself, or pursue someone who has violated your work(s).
Kendall
Well I sure as hell am not going to do that, so if any one has a complaint, it will come down, otherwise enjoy the music of Lisa Gerrard cause the video is subpar anyway.
This is incorrect. Creative Commons is a form of license, and falls under normal copyright law. I'm not a lawyers but here's the gist of my understanding of how copyright law works. Most of this is governed by international treaties so my understanding is that this is fairly consistent but make sure to check up on local laws before acting.
Usually copyright is automatic, you get it as soon as you create the work. You can't copyright an idea but you any creation based on that idea can be copyrighted. Or in other words, there's no such thing as somebody "stealing your idea".
If you haven't registered your copyright then all you can claim are actual damages if somebody infringes your copyright. This means that in most cases you'll be lucky to get awarded a licensing fee for the image. Or in other words, good luck even getting a lawyer to take the case.
Registering your copyright is not required but makes you eligible for statutory damages if your copyright is infringed. If memory serves, this goes into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single violation and I believe legal fees are covered as well. Or in other words, if you've registered your copyright you stand a strong chance of having a lawyer take on the case on spec since he knows he's going to get paid and you will more than likely be able to work out a settlement with the infringer.
Creative Commons is simply a licensing mechanism, you are simply stating that you are granting use of the work under certain terms, which you are granting automatically to everyone instead of negotiating on the spot with somebody. It doesn't impart any more or less protections than what I've outlined above, and if somebody infringes on your work (such as using an image in a commercial way when you've only granted non-commercial use) then you fall back on normal copyright protections.
As a professional music producer and club DJ, I can assure you that no copyright is automatically given to the original creator. Unless you have any form of solid proof that the work is actually yours, anyone can legally claim it, given that they apply the work for copyright holding in any related organisation/stateofficial bureau.
Additionally, Creative Commons has various degrees of restrictions. It's not a forbidding law mechanism of course, but if you can't find a lawyer fast enough, it might be the only proof that your work is actually yours. You can allow full modification, use for profit, or re-work of your product/piece.art/whatever... you can also declare it is free to possess, but not share, or resell, and that credit must be given to the original creator for any modification. And, there is also the option for full restrictions. "All rights reserved", but under the CC ruling.
To be totally honest though, you do are right, when you say that contacting a lawyer is the best option. As I said myself, CC is not the safest of methods, but it's a fast way to secure that you can legally claim ownership if anyone tries to present your work as their own.
Basically, yes. You should contact the artist and ask permission before you do something like that.
No, copyright exists when the work is created. Proof in cases of dispute may be an issue, but that's another matter.
The true essense of copyright, is proof. In an ideal world, we'd respect each other's hard work and not try and exploit anything. Copyright, as we know it, is the mechanism that allows, or dissallows someone to possess a copy of one's work. I was at the studio, in the late 90s, working with a few friends on some of their solo percussion, drum and bass guitar recordings. Some of that staff ended up as chill-out electronica, with some synth riffs and additional sampling. What none of us knew back then, was that we had to find any means to have undisputable proof that the work was indeed ours, especially since we were in a commercial studio. The result? A local label stuffed those tracks in a set of cheap, and popular at the time, chill-out compilations. And, since we had no proof, the copyright was held by the label, and we had no legal claim to our own work.
Yes, ethically, copyright is set the moment you create something. Practically... the world is not so much of an ethic....
This is correct. Proving copyright is different from being granted the right. It's granted as soon as the work is set in a fixed medium. This could be where Yannis' confusion is coming from in the music world, my understanding is that simply performing the work wouldn't count as setting it in a fixed medium so you'd need something further like recording the performance in order to be able to claim copyright.
As I've already said, there's a lot of confusion about copyright and whether registration is required. Copyright is automatic but registering grants you far better protection.
Go to the source:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html#register
For music, a recording of performance may not be enough. Dated (via postal cancellation), sealed, written score-work is your only protection. Long ago, my IP lawyer recommended that I take the written manuscript, copy it, put it in a security envelope, seal it with security tape, and mail it to myself. Only a court of law is to open the package.
Ever since, I have printed source code, compositions, whatever, onto good quality stock and followed those instructions. I store the envelopes in a fire-safe for the least important stuff, and in a bank safe-deposit box for the real important material.
Kendall
That is called the poor mans copyright. I've used it for poems before. It stands up in court well, the postmark is proof of date and government something. I forget the exact term.
The PMC is pretty much a myth, according to this article:
http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/08/25/the-myth-of-poor-mans-copyright/
The PMC is pretty much a myth, according to this article:
http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/08/25/the-myth-of-poor-mans-copyright/
Good article, but you'll see that I wrote "security envelope and security tape." Both which have been accepted by both State and Federal Courts. Also, registering a copyright is a very good idea if you intend to enforce a copyright and are looking for remuneration not just defend ownership. Whenever putting any manuscript into storage one should always sign and date the material.
Kendall
I would think that for images, such as renders and photographs, if you only release a lower resolution copy (say, 1600 x 1200) on the web but keep a high resolution original (4000 x 3000), the inability of a copyright infringer to produce the original would be proof enough in a court of law. But having not searched through court records for precedents, I'm just speculating.
However, as others have noted, proving you're the creator is only half the battle.
In the end, if you want to be able to do much beyond filing DMCA takedown notices on US hosted servers (or the international equivalents), you need to register. As I understand it, not registering, you still have copyright, but you are relying on the good faith and honesty of humanity to honor those rights. All evidence suggests that, if you don't like seeing your art displayed/performed elsewhere, relying on the honesty of millions of strangers across the globe is not a good bet.
I keep all my original Poser and other modeling and rendering software files, my original objects and renders and my original PSDs. If anyone should ever try to challenge me for the rights to my work, I think they'd have a hard time.
I never sign anything - the copyright is mine, signed or not. And quite frankly, I think a huge copyright notice written across an image is pretty ridiculous - esp. if the art sucks. Sorry...