|
"So if nyne11 used the 'likeness' of a Porsche sticker, but not the Porsche script or anything else, if he simply used a similar font and made a sticker that looked like a real sticker, is this legal, i.e. can Porche claim that he is infringing on some 'general appearance copyright'."
The Porsche logo is a trademarked symbol. The word "Porsche" in that distinctive type face is probably also trademarked. However, type is type. the trademarked symbol, "IBM" uses the most common typeface for graphics in the world, Helvetica (Arial is a near knockoff but no clone). I can use Helvetica to spell out anything I want (except for passing off aftermarket accessories as those made by/endorsed by IBM).
"And if nyne11 posts that 'image' online, (maybe without any disclaimers as to ownership or copyright), is it legal to download it use it as the basis of a new sticker?"
It appears (I could be wrong, because he gives conflicting messages) that nyne11 feels the image belongs to him, and that subsequent users should request his permission (which would be granted) before making a new sticker. Is this reasonable?"
Reproducing his original image would infringe upon his design and defacto copyright, even w/o the © or the word copyright. However, that doesn't preclude you from redrawing it, your own version, then it's yours on your own label. Same as he did with the factory sticker. It was his design derived from the factory's image, much as can attempt to photograph a Porsche from the same exact angle, time, day and a myriad of other elements. It still won't/can't be a clone.
"I am NOT trying to make ayone out to be the bad guy, (although nyne11 doesn't appear to agree) and it may be a question of being polite versus law, i.e. if in doubt ask, but I am curious about this. And it's obviously going to happen more and more.
What is fair in this case? What about people who copy images from this forum, then re-use them for instructive purposes on another thread? Technically it's the same thing, isn't it?"
Is commerce part of the equation? If yes, then there are ownership issues. If for instructive purposes, there are fair use allowances. However, I wouldn't presume or claim to be the creator of an image if I wasn't. Neither should anyone else.
And to add some confusion, see my follow up post.
Sherwood
|