Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL
Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum
Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom
Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Jan 26 2:05 pm)
Subject: Good intentions versus copyright rights...?
I work in advertising, and have dealt a lot with copyright issues, and regularly discuss such issues with dedicated copyright lawyers. The bottom line is, if you make a face that looks like a celebrity without their permission, you're in trouble; they could sue you, even if the product was free and your intentions were good. The problem lies in the fact there is no control over the usage of the freebie; people could use them to create artwork that was considered detrimental or damaging to the image or career of the celebrity. As the creator, you could be held legally responsible. There is a possible way round it, and that lies in the definition of the term "inspired by". It is better if you make a face that is not exactly like a celebrity. You can be inspired by a celebrity, but if you add a mole, or change the nose slightly etc, you could be OK. And never call your created face by the same name; even if it doesn't look exactly like them, if it has the same name as the celebrity then it is clear that it was your intent to reproduce their image, and they could even sue you for not getting their face right, which lawyers could argue was damaging to their client in itself! However, if it doesn't look exactly like them, and you don't use their name, then there really isn't much point in doing it, is there?
My advice is; don't do it at all. You can easily make thousands of beautiful faces that don't look like celebrities, so why give yourself extra hassle?
Tricky. It's not strictly a copyright issue, even though there's a little crossover here and there. Various countries have differening degrees of privacy and protection laws. Even so, the issue is really not clear. Theoretically, anyone can take a private legal action against anyone else for anything. If a person in real life was upset that a digital clone was made without their permission, they could tie you up in legal knots even if there is no specific law against it. Even if the likeness is entirely coincidental, you could still find yourself on the receiving end of an injuction to stop the distribution of the likeness. Think about the restrictions on the first DAZ Digital Clone, for example. How can anyone really guarantee that a digital likeness is not going to be used in rape/torture/mutilation scenes? People tend to get upset when they see their own likeness being "abused". Maybe this thread should be moved to the Copyright Forum.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=1978178
Change the name. Instead of "Sofia Loren", use "Madeline" or something.There are a whole lot of real people inspired 3D models out there from free to MP items. However, none of them carry the name of the person they apparently resemble.
Keep in mind too, that while one person might think that a figure looks like Kate Blanchet, another will not see the resemblance. See the above link for an example.
Few faces are copyright. If they were, every single magazine, newspaper and television station would be sued daily for publishing/showing a celebrity's face.
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 05:16
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 05:18
"It is good to see ourselves as
others see us. Try as we may, we are never
able to know ourselves fully as we
are, especially the evil side of us.
This we can do only if we are not
angry with our critics but will take in good
heart whatever they might have to
say." - Ghandi
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=2325215
Here is another thread talking about 3D celebrities, and some aren't even recognizable to some posters."It is good to see ourselves as
others see us. Try as we may, we are never
able to know ourselves fully as we
are, especially the evil side of us.
This we can do only if we are not
angry with our critics but will take in good
heart whatever they might have to
say." - Ghandi
Cassette, the issue isn't about whether or not the person is a celebrity. For example, if I was to make a likeness of my ex-wife and used it in some unflattering or sexual images, she could take legal action against me for it. Whether or not she'd win isn't clear but it would cost me time and money to respond and defend myself. As I said before, copyright is not strictly applicable in these cases. Magazine photos are a different matter because they fall into several different categories, most of which permit the use of the person's image. Some are taken in public and - AFAIK - there's no real way to stop that, unless you live in a country which prevents certain photos being taken without permission. Others are posed for the magazine, with the celeb's full co-operation. The ones which are definitely a no-no are the ones taken from a great distance and a huge zoom lens. A few magazines had their asses kicked recently in related incidents. If a person - celebrity or otherwise - believes an image is detrimental to them in some way, they could take action to stop it being used or distributed. You, as the originator, could be in for a world of trouble. It would most likely be a civil action, since there are no specific criminal laws covering an individual's likeness. Even so, it could be much more trouble than you really need or want.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
I explain the matter. CONFUSED was a series about an internet forum. So forum people was sending me their photos. I used real photos to obtain real likeness between persons and their 3D character (no used for texturing but only for modelling). The strip series was posted for free. It finished a couple of years ago. Now I think in a lot of faces I can offer to the community, and my only fear is the (extremely rare) possibility that if one person would see I'm offering for free a character based in his/her likeness, if he/she has REAL possibilities to protest. I suppose this is a nonsense, but...
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
If your inspiration is someone you know, could you not ask them if they mind being digitalized before you invest all the time and effort creating them? It won't protect you from a lawsuit (unless you have a lawyer create a release form for them to sign in front of a witness)but at least you'll have a better idea of whether or not the are likely to sue you.
"...and my only fear is the (extremely rare) possibility that if one person would see I'm offering for free a character based in his/her likeness, if he/she has REAL possibilities to protest." Well, there is the crux of the matter. As I said above, yes they can protest if they discover the likeness. Just because something is not specifically a crime does not mean you can't get yourself into legal difficulties. I would not be at all happy to have my digital likeness used without my permission and I would make as much trouble as I could for the person responsible.
Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.
- It helps that these people sent their photos voluntarily to you, for you to make a 3D character. So at least we aren't dealing with camera-shy people. And they won't have a complaint that you obtained the image of them, since they gave it to you themselves. 2. However, suddenly having EVERYONE able to make scenes involving those likenesses -- that could deeply bother someone. I don't think you should release those likenesses as is. 3. As suggested, modify the likenesses. Often doesn't take much. 4. DO whatever you can to reach people who sent you photos -- at least post messages in places where those people might be hanging out -- saying what you would like to do, and saying that anyone who doesn't want their likeness used, to please contact you, and you will not use their likeness.
In some cultures taking a photograph of someone is deemed offensive, even if you ask nicely. Some folks just don't like it either, one guy I know will grab your camera and yank the film out. So why not just ask the people around if you can photograph and digitise them? It would save you a lot of hassle, no copyright issues, poor quality source material etc. I've found when playing with digimask some friends are really flattered and fasinated with the idea of being a 'virtual' head.
Pinky - you left the lens cap of your mind on again.
(I think I'm putting myself in the extreme case. As I told, the cloned people aren't poser artist, but current and normal people. The only way to see my freebies is to enter in my websites, and I suppose this is difficult taking in mind I left that forum a couple of years ago. and probably out of context or with different hair or textures, the likeness is very different)
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
What is illegal in one place can be legal in another one. What is legal in one place can be illegal in another one. If you want to follow a law you must follow the law where you are.
Things can be complicated, you can do something that is legal where you are, distribute in a site where is illegal and downloaded by people where is legal again, or any combination.
Anyway, if is legal where you are, you are doing nothing wrong and is not your problem if is illegal in some place or people use it in an illegal way.
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 11:58
Stupidity also evolves!
Just because something is legal where you are doesn't mean that by making it available to people where it isn't legal absolves you of any legal comeback. Just by putting it on the internet, you're making it available. For example, in some countries the age of sexual consent is a lot lower than in the US or UK, but even were it's legal, you don't see them putting stuff up on the internet where everyone can get hold of it. You CAN be prosecuted for crimes committed abroad, and it IS your problem if it is illegal somewhere else. You may also like to bear in mind that legal cases that cross national boundaries cost 10 times as much to defend as cases brought at home. Trust me, you really don't wanna go near this, but if you are serious about it, then don't take advice from people on a forum who may not know what they are talking about; talk to a REAL lawyer!
"you don't see them putting stuff up on the internet where everyone can get hold of it."
Why not????, Poser is illegal in Saudi Arabia, have I to stop making my nude Vickies???
" You CAN be prosecuted for crimes committed abroad, and it IS your problem if it is illegal somewhere else. "
Oh Yes, I am very scared by the Aiatolahs or Christian Puritans. "You may also like to bear in mind that legal cases that cross national boundaries cost 10 times as much to defend as cases brought at home." You must remember that the US refused to sign up the International Justice Court.
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 12:45
Stupidity also evolves!
RCT, you're kidding. I was to write an answer, but kawecki's is better than mine :D
Folks, I needed a general view. But take in mind we are talking about unknown people who has a relative likeness with my designs. Not perfect clones. Britney Spears can be crazy for to contract a lawyer if she would discover a 3D clone of her in a 3D market (because this, there's a product by Gwendolyn called Mandy, not Britney). But who can show it isn't a casual likeness? So more than this in this case: people in an unknown forum on a less unknown country, designed with an unknown software here (Poser is known in Spain probably by less than 1% of people)
I'm not talking about morphs of famous people. Stop strange comments. My Natalia Vodianova Clone (oops, sorry, NattyV2 Clone) was an exception
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 13:07
Message edited on: 12/24/2005 13:08
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
"unknown people" Unknown to us here, what about their friends and family ? Poser and 3d software, like i-clone for an example, is approaching amazing levels of realism. So how would you feel if you saw a near photographic quailty topless image of a 16 yr old teenage relative here in the gallery here ? Cassette - Don't get me wrong this is NOT an attack on your idea. It's the idea that because someone a "celbrity" they have should more rights and controls over their image than some "unknown" person. Just ask people to take part, they won't mind.
Pinky - you left the lens cap of your mind on again.
No, mrsparky. A celebrity haven't should more rights and controls over their image than some "unknown" person. But a celebrity and the crew rolling him/her are accostumed to convert each movement out of their brides in money. Sorry if I have a poor general impression about celebrities Example: if I'm a normal guy, and I sent a photo to Casette and suddenly I discover Casette has designed a freebie with my face, I can be happy or angry but probably I have more important things in mind to worry about it But if I'm the lawyer of Antonio Banderas and suddenly I discover there's a freebie by Casette called "Antonio Banderas for Michael 5" and I see that with a big demand to Casette, Renderosity, e-frontier and DAZ3D I can get a bunch of bucks from Antonio (having success or not that demand), I'll call Antonio Banderas and I'll say: "boss, you must see this, these fellows are using your image out of our license" Capitalism, yeah. If I kill my wife, surely I'll be in jail the rest of my life. But if my name is O. J. Simpson and (perhaps) I kill my wife, I have an enormous amount of dollars to buy my freedom. Your rights are proportional to the money that you have This is the difference I see when I talk about celebrities and normal people. I'm sure no one of my forum ex-friends could demand me, they have no money or time for nonsenses. Lawyers of celebrities yes, they NEED to squeeze their client
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"
"Your rights are proportional to the money that you have." That is SO true. However, consider the case of the photographer Alison Jackson, who specializes in satirical photos of celebrity lookalikes. Suppose she finds someone, let's say, called Sheila Smith, who looks very like Brittney Spears. Suppose she takes some embarrassing photos and publishes them without comment. It looks like Brittney Spears doing something embarrassing, but what is the real Brittney Spears to do? How can any court of law rule that it is impermissible to publish photos of Sheila Smith? So in the case of any digital clone, unless it was made from scans of an original celebrity, it is likely to bear less resemblance to the celebrity in question than some other real person does. And you cannot ban the Sheila Smiths of the world from showing their face in public. And the same goes for non-celebrities as well.
Steal $50 and your are a rotten dirty thief. Steal $50,000,000 and you are a pillar of society.
IMHO people have no right to sue unless they can demonstrate actual damages... that is the standard to which us plebes are held why should it be any different for the people with the money? Oh yeah, because they got the money :)
Daumier said his drawing of a pear was just a drawing of a pear and if the prosecutor thought it looked like the Emperor it was certainly not the fault of the artist. He did however serve six months.
I say Cassette, do your worst!!! Strike your blow for artists, where would Picasso have gotten if he had been sued by the linoleum manufacter who produced the wicker cane he used in his collage? Anyway, aren't there not jurisdictional issues in your case anyway?
Privacy Notice
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
Hi folks Related with the Poser New Year's Resolutions thread... I want to discuss this with you to know your opinion. Maybe I roll things too much in my head, but... crazy world, I prefer my back covered I have hundred, thousands of freebies. And I want to create some of mine. I'm not good with textures or modelling, but I have a touch with faces (people still is downloading my V2 Natalia Vodianova Clone). And I have a lot of faces created by me for V2, M2 and V3 (a lot of stuff created for my CONFUSED comic strips). So I want to return the community the gift of so many frebs uploading them. But the trouble is... I know all the matter about Celebrities 3D clones, where to avoid legal troubles vendors and designes changes the names. What troubles can have I if I distribute a freebie with a face inspired in a real woman? Take in mind: they aren't poserworld people (and fcors I doubt they have schizofrenic lawyers in search of indemnifications like celebrities), so probabilities that they would see their face converted in freebie are minimum, but... anything goes. What do you think? If I would have the hypotetic case of an angry girl screaming: "I'll demand you for design a freebie inspired in my face", might I answer: "you're kidding" or might I call my lawyer?
CASETTE
=======
"Poser isn't a SOFTWARE... it's a RELIGION!"