Legality of Appropriation of Images

[dcushnie]

Hi, I'm wondering about image appropriation, especially in regard to graphic designing in photoshop. As a background, I'm entirely self taught in photoshop and most of the work I've done, whether for fun or for semi-commercial use, has been photography based. So, when I started messing around with graphic designing, I based my style around taking images or little pieces of images and altering them to the point where they've become a new graphic. Most of these alterations are from my own images, ex: http://a1.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/142/e5837ed34697466385a1a8789f273046/l.jpg, but I've found that I can do the same thing by taking photos off the internet and altering them.

My main question was with regard to this image, which probably won't be used commercially (mainly because the artist doesn't like it-- I made it for fun anyway): Album Cover Design Silhouetted (1st Draft) | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I posted my question in the description for the photo, but I'll repeat it here anyway:

The background was cropped out, faux-'vectorized,' colored and edited from an old movie poster of the film "Metropolis," by Fritz Lang. I feel like the adjustments are very significant and I've seen plenty of album covers and other art taken from appropriated material (think Warhol), but I was wondering whether anyone knew more about image appropriation and whether or not a design such as this would constitute copyright infringement (if a copyright is even still in place since the original was made in the 20's- the rights to the film itself have been re-bought but not sure about the poster) Thanks for any insight!!

update: I looked closer at the website (http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/images/2010/08/METROPOLIS_Quad_Poster_72dpi_1920pixels.jpg) and it's apparently the poster from the 2010 restoration, not from 1927, which would indicate copyright is currently in place. However, I know there are appropriation laws regarding manipulation of original images. I'm not super concerned as this photo is fairly manipulated from the original and so far it's not being used for commercial work, but I'd like to know more about the copyright laws if anyone knows, for current and future reference.

Thanks for any help,
Doug

 

[dcushnie]

This question could also apply to this image I made: buy. fear. want. | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[Vafann]

You have asked a very interesting question, and I have been googling around. The whole issue seems to depend on interpretation of certain copyright laws, but as far as I have understood, the key to it being ok are the terms "Fair use" and "transformational" The more you transform the original into something different the better, and it depends on what you are going to use it for. I have looked through several really long and boring leagl documents, but they all pretty much seem to be summed up here in a clearer way.

Fair Use Frequently Asked Questions | Teaching Copyright

 

[Boomawoom]

I've always been under the impression that it's fine to use photos for non-commercial use (unless it says otherwise) but if you're doing a commercial design then you should use stock images (there's a lot of free stock image galleries and paid ones) or ask the photographers permission. I don't know if these are the actually rules but I'd doubt you'd get into trouble if you follow this. Also if you are making a design for your portfolio and you're using photos you found all over the internet then you should referenced them at the end (just add links to them).

 

[fenix]

No, it´s not okay in a legal sense but in harsh reality it often turns-out that way anyhow because an ordinary photo seldom fulfills the criterias for becoming classified as Artwork. It´s only the Artwork that enjoys the full protection from the legal system, not simple photos even if they happen to be very good ones. As a photographer you of course own the copyright of everything you do, but you have to file a civil complaint and for that to work you also have to prove that you have suffered economical damage from the theft.. which in reality seldom could occur if the person snatching it only use it for non commercial purposes.