[Clipart] Copyrighted material appearing on the website.

[Jon Phillips]

they should be removed

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 1:48 AM, Jarod Russel <JarodR at gmx.de> wrote:
> Here we already go with a good example.
> http://www.openclipart.org/detail/31843 and
> http://www.openclipart.org/detail/31567 shows an Audi A4 with the audi logo
> on it.
>
>
> Am 16-Mar-10 03:47 AM, schrieb chovynz:
>>
>> You said it better than what I did. Haha! Thanks for clearing it up. :)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Chovynz
>>
>>
>> On 16/03/2010 2:27 a.m., Jason Simanek wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/15/2010 12:53 AM, chovynz wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Conversally, I would say that clipart of copyrighted designs (in the
>>>> physical) are ok. If we stuck to a hard line like "No clipart of a
>>>> copyrighted/recognisable brand of car" then we would have no clipart
>>>> whatsoever of any technology since everything is patented, and we would
>>>> have no clipart of any people without their express consent (which in
>>>> many cases is impossible to get). "Clipart" is different to "Designs".
>>>
>>> For the record, you don't want to confuse patents with copyrights.
>>> Patents, at least in the U.S., refer to unique solutions or methods to solve
>>> problems or tasks. Patents also have a very short lifespan. In the U.S. they
>>> are only intended to protect inventors so that they have a few years to
>>> market their original product without being undercut by larger existing
>>> companies/manufacturers. This isn't always the case due to the U.S. patent
>>> system having been... hijacked. But it is the actual reason for existence of
>>> patent protection.
>>>
>>> Copyright is much different. Copyrights in the U.S. applies to written
>>> text and pretty much anything remotely considered artistic. A copyright is
>>> protected for up to [I think] 60 years after the DEATH of the creator (you
>>> can thank Walt Disney for that). So this is a very different thing.
>>>
>>> Anyway, as a professional graphic designer and sometime illustrator, I am
>>> quite certain that Volkswagen cannot sue you for taking a photograph or
>>> making a drawing of a VW Beetle. You just can't make an image of their logo,
>>> reuse their pitch line or stuff like that. The car's design might fall under
>>> copyright, but if you aren't building a car that looks exactly like a VW
>>> Beetle and selling it for profit, you aren't breaking their copyright. A
>>> drawing of a car is not a car.
>>>
>>> Just to be safe, you'll probably want to leave logos or logotypes off of
>>> any such illustrations. You should be in the clear.
>>>
>>> Rule of thumb: if it's already 2-D artwork, don't copy it. If you are
>>> making a drawing of a physical object you are creating an original piece of
>>> artwork.
>>>
>>> U.S. Copyright Office
>>> http://www.copyright.gov/
>>>
>>> The 'Frequently Asked Questions' is quite good. Not that U.S. copyright
>>> and patent law is the only country's laws to be worried about, but as I
>>> understand it the U.S. has the most strict laws in place.
>>>
>>> Hope this helps, but if you can find a lawyer to help out that wouldn't
>>> hurt.
>>>
>>> -Jason Simanek
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> clipart mailing list
>>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> clipart mailing list
>> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clipart mailing list
> clipart at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/clipart
>



-- 
Jon Phillips
http://rejon.org/
http://fabricatorz.com/
internet: @rejon + skype: kidproto
+1.415.830.3884 (sf/global)
+86.134.3957.2035 (china)