Recently, on another forum, I have seen someone using this avatar:
Look familiar, anyone?
I PM'ed him about it, asking if he'd gotten it from here. He denied it strongly and rudely. He claimed he'd scanned the image.
Just so everyone can see the resemblance:
This is the Paizo avvy.
What I want to know: Is this legal?
Even if he scanned it, it would still be under copyright. On the other hand, it's probably not worth getting into a legal fight over it. Most avatars on other message boards are, I'm sure, not in compliance with copyright regulations.
The question would be if it counts as "fair use" or not.
Given that the ganked image is byte-for-byte identical with the one hosted on our servers, I think it's a clear case of avatar gankination.
Bwahaha! I have the Postmonster on my side! The 'ganker' doesn't stand a chance! ;)
Anyways, I don't intend on getting into a lawsuit. I'll politely PM him about it, and then I'll let it drop. Others may not, though...maybe I should warn him that he might open the door to find a cloaked man and a creepy pony. Nobody deserves to wake up to that as a surprise.
The question would be if it counts as "fair use" or not.
No. Under US copyright law, you can only claim fair use for certain jounralistic, educational or critical commentary purposes -- a avatar is none of those.
If necessary, we can have a lich law clerk send a "cease and desist or have your soul sucked" letter to the infringer.
At the very least, it's usage without attribution, which is bad form and rude.
|
I have done this. I really want to know if it is illegal. I was unaware that using an image like that for an avatar is wrong. I mean maybe because it is original Paizo art it is bad but about a D&D mini pic for an avatar with the image ganked from here, is that illegal? Wrong? I truly want to know how Paizo feels about it and if it is really illegal.
Recently, on another forum....
Yeah...but you're a cat lovin person...so, yer point doesn't matter :)
SNARK !!!!
Alright, here's an update.
Are you a Paizonian? Because I am, by the name of Kobold Cleaver. Or The Gremlin here. I think that you're aware that that avvy is stolen, and I'm almost certain it's not allowed. If they wanted them to be used on other forums, they would have said so.Huh? This is found all over the internet. Its the base picture of an Iron Dragon from D&D. Its found in Dragon Magazine.
I uploaded this one myself form my comp. So there's no way it could have been stolen. since i scanned in the dragon page and cropped out the head. I unfortunately deleted the original piece because of space requirements, or I'd show you that.
I'd like to point out that Paizo has no rights over that art because it is not originally theirs. I use this art because i always point out to anyone who asks that I made it myself from the D&D/Dragon Magazine Iron dragon art, and that I own a copy of the issue in question, And If Dragon Magazine wishes to complain about me using then i will be happy to stop, but until then it will be my avatar.
Anything else you wish to waste my time with?
Yes.
Perhaps you are right about whether Paizo owns the rights, but you are most definitely lying about scanning it. Take a look at these two pictures:
[img]http://paizo.com/image/avatar/3_Iron-Dragon.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dragcaveforum.technoized.com/uploads/av-12346.jpg[/img]
The top one is a Paizo avatar. The bottom is yours.
Methinks they are one and the same.
Perhaps it is not against Paizo's rules, but I intend to find out. At any rate, if you are so sure it's allowed, why did you lie about it?Really now.... It is entirely possible for me to have selected the same area as who ever made the Pazio avatar. unlikely yes, but entirely possible.
I'm sorry that you seem to have taken offense to me and my avatar, But this is not my problem. I'm sorry that you seem to think I'm Lying but the facts remain the same. the only one who is lying is whoever is claiming to have made the art themselves, it the art belongs to the person who made it for Dragon Magazine and wizards of the Coast who own D&D.
I made this myself on Photoshop. As I said between space requirements and the death of my old computer (On which i was keeping the files because i have no room on my current one) I no longer have the original file. but i most certainly did not take it from where ever you think I did. I had never even heard of that site until you contacted me.
I would suggest that you contact who ever made the other avatar and ask them were they got the art from. since the only time I've ever seen it before that wasn't the internet was in the Dragon magazine. either way its come from somewhere and someone else.
Is it illegal? Probably. Are you going to jail for it? No. Probably not even going to court since it would be pretty insignificant damage to the intellectual property... at least for everything but trademark. Trademarks are more dangerous since the trademark owner cannot really elect to not pursue infringements.
As long as it's limited to things like internet message boards and just used to jazz up your user ID block then I would expect most companies to shrug it off even if it's not technically fair use.
But the real question: who would want to risk being mistaken for Sharoth?
The SHAME!!!
But the real question: who would want to risk being mistaken for Sharoth?
Obviously a sick, deranged, annoying lunatic. Like Sharoth. After all, nobody else could ever be mistaken for that crazy gecko.
Chief Technical Officer
|
As long as it's limited to things like internet message boards and just used to jazz up your user ID block then I would expect most companies to shrug it off even if it's not technically fair use.
That's all pretty much on the nose—technically, it's violation of copyright, but it's the kind of violation that's overlooked by pretty much anybody reasonable.
"Him" is right about one thing—artwork from Dragon and Dungeon is not Paizo's intellectual property—those copyrights belong to Wizards of the Coast. (However, I'm pretty confident that bringing this to their attention would be considered a waste of everyone's time.)
I'd also like to add that there is no way that "scanning the same area" could result in a byte-for-byte-identical copy of the JPEG. Even if you used the same scanner on the same computer with the same software to scan precisely the same section of the same copy of the magazine, the resulting files would be different. (And it's not scanned from the printed magazine anyway; it was created from digital files.)
Way to take the initiative, KC.
The length of his response is clear proof of worry.
I'd also like to add that there is no way that "scanning the same area" could result in a byte-for-byte-identical copy of the JPEG. Even if you used the same scanner on the same computer with the same software to scan precisely the same section of the same copy of the magazine, the resulting files would be different. (And it's not scanned from the printed magazine anyway; it was created from digital files.)
If I was a man with more free time I might scream "SHALLONGE!" from the highest peak then cloister myself away for decades until I had an identical file.
But even if I succeeded, what a sad, lonely victory that would be.
Way to take the initiative, KC.
The length of his response is clear proof of worry.
I detect sarcasm...
That's all pretty much on the nose—technically, it's violation of copyright, but it's the kind of violation that's overlooked by pretty much anybody reasonable.
This is why I love Paizo. You get the Seal of Approval!
I detect sarcasm...Way to take the initiative, KC.
The length of his response is clear proof of worry.
Nope. Your detectalator must be busted. I meant it in earnest.
Yeah, guys, I know that I can't really charge him...I'm just asking him to stop and thought I'd see if it was actually illegal. Thanks, all.
|
The length of his response is clear proof of worry.
Yeah, he wasted a lot of electrons when a simple, "Dude, whatEVER." would have sufficed.
[Note from Vic: Ooops... sorry, Set—I accidentally edited your post when I meant to reply to it, and overwrote the original text. I put back as much as I could recover. My apologies...]