Register · Software · Search · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting

Moderated by: guardian
Username   Password

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
FM Forums | PRO digital corner | Join Image Upload
end
Go to previous topic Go to next topic
John Patrick
Online
Buy and Sell: On
p.1 #1 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


All:

I may be contracted to take a few (really, about 4-5) interior shots of a restaurant that is just starting out. In my initial perusal of the restaurant, they have several nice oil paintings hung around the dining area.

Can anyone point me toward any information on whether there is any problem with having these within a shot that is used for advertising for the restaurant? The owner wants to leave them on the wall for the shots, but I'm worried about having copyrighted works of art within a photograph used for advertising?

I would especially like the opinion and/or information from anyone who has done advertising shots before.

Thanks,
John


Mar 30, 2008 at 05:47 PM
claudermilk
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #2 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


I don't think there will be a problem since they won't be the main focal point of the shot. Double check to be sure, but I think you should be ok.

Mar 31, 2008 at 04:34 PM
John Patrick
Online
Buy and Sell: On
p.1 #3 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


Chris, do you know anyone who does commercial/advertising photo work that has any experience with these matters?

John


Mar 31, 2008 at 05:32 PM
Soupdragon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #4 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


Because the retaurant owner owns the pictures there should be no problem.
Also, you are not attempting to make financial gain from the wall hangings themselves, they are purely coincidental.

Mar 31, 2008 at 05:38 PM
Craig Gillette
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #5 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


I doubt there is a problem, you aren't using the images in a a way that takes away from the potential market for the pictures, etc. Think of all of the various advertising you've seen for any number of hotels, restaurants, etc. If they stripped any kind of art or similar items out of the pictures, the "ads" would present a rather austere and uninviting location. And can you imagine what an artist would do for his own commercial sales if he/she made a fuss over inclusion of the wall art in a customers ads? Simple solution, Joe Painter doesn't want his images in our advertising? We won't buy any more of his works for our establishments.

That's my general impression. Real legal advice would have to come from a lawyer and probably depends on the specifics of the works and the way they'd appear in the ads, etc.

Apr 03, 2008 at 02:44 AM
runner301
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #6 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


You need to be careful. I would try to get permission from the artists. I used to do legal work in this area. The key to fair use in this case would be to what extent the artwork would be visible in the images you take. This is the De Minimis Defense, which claims that the copyrighted artwork is too small to be clearly recognizable

"In some cases, the amount of material copied is so small (or "de minimis") that the court permits it without even conducting a fair use analysis. For example, in the motion picture Seven, several copyrighted photographs appeared in the film, prompting the copyright owner of the photographs to sue the producer of the movie. The court held that the photos "appear fleetingly and are obscured, severely out of focus, and virtually unidentifiable." The court excused the use of the photographs as "de minimis" and a fair use analysis was not required. ( Sandoval v. New Line Cinema Corp., 147 F.3d 215 (2d Cir. 1998).)

As with fair use, there is no bright line test for determining a de minimis use. For example, in another case, a court determined that the use of a copyrighted poster for a total of 27 seconds in the background of the TV show, "Roc" was not de minimis. What distinguished the use of the poster from the use of the photographs in the Seven case? The court stated that the poster was clearly visible and recognizable with sufficient observable detail for the "average lay observer " to view the artist's imagery and colorful style. ( Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television, Inc. 126 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 1997).)"

-from the Stanford Copyright and Fairuse Website

Many factors would come into play in a case like this, including the prominence of the artwork in your images, the original value of the artwork, and the uniqueness of the artwork. For the most part, seeing as your images would actually increase viewership and therefore the value of the artwork, (assuming the artwork is by local, not nationally famous artists), you would probably be clear under fair use, but you never know...

It would be much easier to simply get permission from the artists.

Have a great day!
Tom

Edited on Apr 03, 2008 at 11:24 AM


Apr 03, 2008 at 11:17 AM
thebmrust
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #7 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


http://www.photoattorney.com

Apr 03, 2008 at 06:36 PM
thebmrust
Offline
Image Upload: Off
p.1 #8 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


Soupdragon wrote:
Because the retaurant owner owns the pictures there should be no problem.
Also, you are not attempting to make financial gain from the wall hangings themselves, they are purely coincidental.


1) The restaurant owner may own the physical art, but doesn't own the copyright, unless the owner created the art.

2) If he's being contracted, then he is making a financial gain. Not from the art, but from the project.

3) It's not coincidental when the project is being planned and executed.

Find the creator, request a release. If the creator requires a fee, remove the art and replace it with your own or have the facility owner pay that fee.

Apr 03, 2008 at 06:40 PM
Ryan Britton
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
p.1 #9 · Incidental reproduction of art (copyrighted works)


Two recent rulings on that:

http://williampatry.blogspot.com/search?q=Schrock


Apr 03, 2008 at 11:03 PM

FM Forums | PRO digital corner | Join Image Upload
end
  Go to previous topic Go to next topic

You are not logged in. Login or Register

  Username   Password  
Lost password?