Using textures from the net in SL and copyright issures

What's the legal scoop on using (copywritten) textures from the net in SL. Obviously a registared trademark or an entire picture is a no-no, but sometimes I see a detail within a posted picture- brickwork, plants, pebbles, rust etc.. that I'm tempted to download, make seamless in Photoshop, and import to SL.

Is bringing in a highly modified piece of a web image ok?

I often wonder this myself. How much modification does one need to perform on a stolen texture before it becomes YOUR texture?

LMAO, actually with copyright law depending what it is where it is and how it was absconded will determine either copyright / fair use or Theft.

For instance you see a great grass texture that is encompased within a picture of a house and stream. Well you cut out the house you cut out the stream and only use the Grass. at this point you no longer have any semblence of the orginal imagery thus falls under fair use.

Now Same picture its a well known house and stream say its a Salvador Dali picture and you cut out everything but the house and stream. Then you have infringed because the orginal compisition can be totaly distinguished thus becomes a diriviative work aka copyright Issue.

Now Same picture same artist you bring it in SL as is and have not recieved permission to use it in SL or any medium you have stolen it blatently.

Hope that explains the differences..

Shadow

the old standard was 7 visible changes. I don't think this applies anymore under the DMCA (2nd worst piece of legislation EVER... the first being the "Patriot" Act)

Ah, so the big melting-eyelash-on-a-crutch texture is a no?


Seriously, thanks for the input, Shadow

Good post, Shadow! Do you remember that elongated thread on copyright issues from about six or nine months ago? It contained a lot of good information on this and related topics, but I have a feeling it was lost in the great forum purge of last fall.

Also, what is your take on the "fair use" argument when you are using the image only for your own build/object, with no intent to re-sell in-world?

Heres another way to think about it. If you found it on the internet and the page didn't say you can't use it then it's fine Really, theres nothing to worry about unless you go out of your way to rip textures off of places you shouldn't.

Shadow you rock.

This reminds me of my college mantra:
"Copy one source, it's plagiarism. Copy 3 sources, it's research."

Yeah I remember it I was head over heals in the middle of it.

Well, on the fair use thing that can be turned and screwed so many ways even my lawyers wont touch it because its so convoluted even in its current format by US law.

So as per my lawyers statment to me..."If you have one inkling of a doubt don't do it and save yourself the possible grief"

Some things I dont think people remember about Copyright was the penalties per infringement if the Item is registered with the Copyright office.
It's 20k US Currency per infringement and in some cases in SL could you Imagine 500 Tshirts with that Salvador Dali Pic on it .
...OMG thats 100,000,000 dollars there is no way in hell I have that kinda money.

So basicaly with that said just be careful with what you claim as your own and remember the claiment has the burden of proof not you.

9 times out of 10 its very very expensive for someone to claim copyright but big companys can and will do it. If a person registeres a texture or Item with the Copyright office and has the documentation trail that follows it, then it doesnt take long to prove and when its all said and done the Supreme Justic holds no qualms or quarrels about sticking it to the offender.

Trade Mark on the other hand is a blatent NO NO as those can be proven outright and rather quickly as well.

Shadow

When in doubt, use fair-use images:

http://www.planethalflife.com/wadfather/

And while I'm at it, an example of sounds:

http://www.sounddogs.com/start.asp

everyone is always worried about copywrite stuff here.. how many copywrite cases have y ou heard of lately? lol none

I saw some guy selling posters from popular movies. They had sound clips from their respective movies. This was blatent as hell! I think it's only a matter of time b4 something big comes up involving copyright. How friggin hard is it to make your own stuff???

I realize the chance of actually getting prosecuted for this kind of thing is very unlikely, but I'd prefer to play it safe.

i always say if even the original artist couldn't tell it's their image then you're safe.

There is a concept I call "right-clickers' rights". It is similar to the notion of quoting up to 250 or 450 words in a passage in a book in a book review. You can reference an image and discuss it. Making a tiny version of an image in a game that amounts to a dollhouse with miniature furniture and clothes can be construed as a reference. There is also a landmark court case in California concerning the right to reference images, i.e. having small versions of an image linking to another image on another web page. We had resources on this issue at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/simalbums or you can google for it.

If you can right-click on it, and you are not using it for profit, and you are putting it into a miniature form in this game, it would be hard to make a court case out of it. If someone doesn't want an image taken, they need to disable the right-clicking feature on their website.

A fellow once tried to shut my tripod site down because I used a tiny version of his cloud picture as a rug tile in my Sims offline game and put it on my Sims website for others to download for free. I had tripod review it and in the end, they reinstated my site and he was forced to back off, there was no case. Of course SL is different with its play money turning into real money, but at the end of the day, it's a dinky reference, IMHO.

Disabling right-click does not prevent someone from grabbing an image from a website. There are a couple ways around that disabled function.

Copyright issues are between the creator and the user. LL would not enforce copyright unless there was a complaint from the creator.

Most images from the web have no copyrights whatsoever.

Excerpts are allowed in almost any multimedia instance.

Worse thing that could happen is your account banned for a period, but thats in the extreme case. Generally, if an issue is raised, you may be asked to remove the material.

Alot of SL players are outside of copyright jurisdiction anyway. I thumb my Canadian nose at the RIAA every day

In response to:



and



These are both unfortunately common false assumptions. Just because an image doesn't state that it is copyrighted doesn't mean that it isn't. And just because a site doesn't say you can't use them doesn't mean you can. Any work a creator creates is instantly copyrighted upon creation. They don't have to slap a copyright notice on it or anything. If a creator / artist wants to allow their work to be used by anyone for free they will say so explicitly. Most likely everything on the web IS copyrighted. If they allow a different kind of usage they will say so.

Of course a big problem are sites that collect images from artist websites and make it seem like they are all up for grabs as "clip-art". I think that is where a lot of this misconception comes from.

Unfortunatley SL seems a haven for infringement. See the numerous examples of copyrighted artwork on sale in world. It seems that LL's policy is to not deal with it and require each infringed artist to file a DMCA complaint themselves. Of course most of the infringed artists have no idea SL even exists... yet people are making money off of their work.

You are utterly misinformed.

The worst thing that could happen is that you could be sued, just like file-sharers are being sued by the RIAA. Actually, considering the U.S. is looking at criminalizing copyright infringement, the worst that could happen is you could be extradited and thrown in jail.

Why, do most SL players live on Mars?

Go ahead and thumb your nose. Canada has a recording industry too, and every major U.S. label has a counterpart here [edit: "here" being "Canada". I'm Canadian.].

Big companies DO come after people who knowlingly use/abuse their materials. There have been several teachers in the Houston area who have been taken to court for misusing Disney products. So... be careful

Here is an excerpt of the document on fair use guidelines for digital images from the US Patent office. It's a LONG document, but this passage from the preamble seemed to be a helpful summary as it pertains to SL.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/olia/confu/conclu2.html

And sometimes, in doubt, just chain really long strings of legal lingo together if you can't decidedly say what's "fair use". Alternatively, you could invent new words.

Muahaha! Is it any wonder that you're the most beloved of all SLers?

Devyn, just a minor correction in your statement about copyright. Yes its true that the moment a person creates something its copyrighted but that still does not illicite Judicial punishment over it.

Ask any lawyer dealing with Business law about copyright infringment. Here are the first two questions asked 9 times out of 10.

#1 Do you have your Image/Recording/Facimile registered with the Copyright office?

Now the second question will either be #2A if its yes or #2B if its no.

#2A Ok What is the file number and lets get started.

#2B Ok how much money are you willing to spend as my fees are 1000 an hour for research?

This is sincere because for 2A they have no qualms about taking 10% of 20,000 per infringment.

But when its 2B the maximum rewarded is less than 2,000 per infrigement. At best the person sueing spends 10x more than the minimum reward which as been know to award at 200 per infringment.

as for the rest of your post your pretty much dead on target with the data. The one little point of whether its registered or not makes a big difference in prosecution. Keep that in mind..

Shadow

Yes, I understand the actual process of pursuing an infringement case is a lot more complicated and beyond the means of a lot of artists, and that registering the copyright will give the artist a lot more power in the legal realm. My main point is to simply dispel some of the mis-informed notions that were stated earlier in the thread (those I quoted in my reply). There is no doubt that people can get away with it, but that doesn't make it ethically right or legal.

I appreciate your clarification on the prosecution angle - definitely a good thing to keep in mind.