Could anyone tell me if a 'looks like' character is infringing on someones copyright? for example I have created several models and morphs to create the characters from the harry potter movies. As such would that be trespassing on J.K Rowlings territory if I made the models available to others? Second, if I were to use as a base model, say one of the DAZ characters to create my own character, would that be trespassing even though the mesh, morphs, and textures are my originals? Example, I load victoria 3 into my c4d, then beside, create my model. (Like a sculpter using a model to get the general shape of his creation) If anyone could shed some light on this for me I would truly appreciate it. bobcat

In greatly simplified terms if you don't try to or plan to make money it you're generally safe making look a likes of protected characters

Depends what you mean... do they look like the depictions of the characters from the films? Or do they represent your own imaginations of the characters from the books? If the former, you could run into problems... if the latter and you make no general mention of 'Harry Potter' you can be in no danger of upsetting anyone! H:))

Well, I don't plan on making any profit whatsoever, and as for who they look like, they do look like the film characters. But I am working on textures and deformers that will create my interpretation of what the characters looked like in the books.

You might want to check out the info over in the Copyright Forum; I found it very helpful the other day. And if you do make the HP look-alikes, I for one would very much like to see them, not to mention beg for a Snape & Harry of my very own -- though you can keep Gilderoy Lockehart. ::snerk:: That pompous git'd be wanting a closet bigger than V3's and no way can my computer or my budget handle that. Good luck and let the rest of us wizard fanciers know how things turn out.

interested in snape as a proffessor, or snape as student? (Described in order of the phenox)I've done both.

Well, Daz released a "Barny" character for the Freak that is a blatant Arnold Schwarzenegger ripoff so I'd assume that if they can do it, anyone can. Just give the character a different name.

yeah call him Snipe or something instead. I'd be interested too. I tried making a Snape not so long ago (was sidetracked and that's why it's still not 100% done) but if youre going by the books and not the movie you should be totally safe anyway. It's YOUR vision.

I"m not sure if characters based on the books are "no problem", understand the books are copyrighted too. It's not true that "as long as you don't make money it's not a problem". If it is found you infringed on a copyright you are guilty whether you give away the items or sell them. It may be "your vision", but it is "their copyrighted characters". In some cases "they" may not notice your product, but if they do, you can be sued, and the cost to you can run from ten's of thousands of dollars to millions.

Parody is protected. Nobody ever heard of Mad magazine for chrissakes? Just don't use the actual names of the characters or the book/movies. Though that last bit isn't such a big deal usually if it's not for profit. Most companies have better things to do than squash fan art. There are exceptions though... In the past Fox, shut down some PC game mods based on... I believe... Aliens, Funimation Made some guys doing a Dragonball Z mod shut down (Only cuz it was better than their own game :p) Also stay away from Disney... they will try to sue anyone!

I don't remember which forum it was, but there was an answer that went like this: "If you have to ask, then it's probably not a good idea to try to sell it." Also, parody and satire is a fine line. MAD magazine can get away with it because that is obviously meant as humor. If you sell a "Snope" character (obviously a version of "Snape") with the sole intention of making money, where is the "humor" to classify it as parody? But, "close enough" usually works for most things, especially in the 3D world. Many companies own the likenesses for a specific use (you can't make and sell a movie using Harry Potter characters). But a digital version for use only in Poser? Definitely a gray area.

The problem with HP characters won't be the copyright - it's the trademark. WB are extremely zealous about protecting their trademarks, and the HP movies are a WB product. If you're doing character likenesses you should be okay. But as others have said, don't use the character names with them, or anything that looks like the HP logo.

sounds like I might be walking on thin ice with chisel shoes...I've emailed the question to Rowling to see what she had to say. They are after all her creation, so now its just the waiting game until she replies. In the meantime I've found everyones posts very informative.

there were some questions and answers to copywrite issues here at r'osity a couple of months back. and, what i gleaned from them is that you cannot make a model that looks like another copywritten character without infringing the original copywrite. i was interested because i'd like to model some creatures and things that i have seen in 2d images at some other sites on the web. from what i gather it is a no can do.

I think it all rests in permission of the copyright holder. If you look back at TSR when they ran D&D, they were extremely vicious in protecting thier product. Right to the point that they were unable to create thier website because it infringed on their own restrictions!! But when Wizards of the coast took over, they did a complete turnaround, and now anyone can use and display D&D products and characters freely as long as it is not in a way that defames WOtC, they consider it almost as free publicity, which in a way it is.

You should look at the "Van Helsing" characters at Runtime DNA. They are obviously similar to the movie, but not too similar as to be copyright infringement. I think they call the Van Helsing character "Beast Hunter." The point is you can't copyright a "vampire hunter" but you can copyright "Van Helsing." A model with Hugh Jackman's face would obviously violate copyright (or Hugh Jackman's right to promote his image), but a guy with long hair in a trench coat with a crossbow? Not copyright infringement. The reason people get busted for aliens ripoffs is because the models are pretty specific and exact copies.

I suppose I could tweak the morphs a bit, at least enough to keep my lobster out of the hot water. I checked out the characters at DNA, pretty cool.

You CANNOT copyright your face. There is a whole industry of Celebrity impersonators you know. I fail to se any difference in creating a digital doppelganger of a real actor. That being said if you make a double of something that was originally Drawn, painted, sculpted or modelled, that may be a different issue. Personally I'd never ask the creator (more like the many corporations that have their grimy hands in the pot) as some lawyer is always gonna advise em to say no. Better to just do it, then hop to if they send you a cease and desist... which isn't very likely anyway.

Excuse me if this comes thru twice, been having ::cough:: technical difficulties. This matter came up awhile back on some of the HP fan groups I belong to and it was mentioned that JKR herself does not own the rights to anything to do with the Harry Potter movies. She (or her publisher) sold them to Warner Films, so even if she wanted to, she can't permit use of movie characters. For that you need to go to Warner's licensing department. If they say yes, it's no doubt gonna cost a small fortune, depending on what particular rights you want. Non-profit fan usage might be allowed, with a whole bunch of restrictions, but if it's something you want to sell they'll either say no or demand a really big chunk of the pie. On the bright side, even if they refuse permission, they'll at least know there's a market for a product that's certainly gonna promote their movies.

You can't copyright your face, per se, but actors have some sort of right preventing you from using their image or likeness without permission. It may have something to do with defamation laws. Impersonators get away with it because it is parody.

I guess what it comes down to is common sense. For non profit fan art type things, (Or even reletively low profit, as I am certain hollywood types would consider Poser characters, or artwork auctioned at cons etc...) Most copyright holders turn a blind eye as long as you don't step on their toes by infringing on their serious profits. The Troopers mod for Unnreal tournament hasn't been "foxed" yet becaus Lucasarts knows it isn't likely to affect the sales of their games. In fact being too hard on fans can create hard feeling and theoretically HURT their profits.

Yep, nobody knows that better than the Star Trek & Star Wars moguls. They tried slapping fan producers down until they realized that was bad for business, so now it's pretty much live & let live -- as long as nobody but Lucasfilms & Paramount makes any money from Luke Skywalker & Captain Kirk. Which is fair enough since it's their property. Regarding Snape & Potter, well there's no law against creating & distributing a generic Alchemist & Apprentice type character. Those are folklore concepts and therefore in the public domain. Even if it can be made to somewhat resemble JKR's or Warner's versions. Heck, if being a look-alike, celebrity or not, is a copyright violation, shouldn't folks who are twins be arrested?

Love that last comment!

Thank you. Another suggestion: I'm not sure if it was here or on another Poser site I read about a modeller with a similar problem only it was spaceships. Star Trek fans would be the biggest market, only trouble was selling the Enterprise is a trademark violation and a sure-fire to get your ass sued. However, selling a kit that could be customized any way the user liked, even if user could create an Enterprise clone from all the parts was okay. Maybe you could do something like that. A "build-your-own" Potions Master. Magic!