|
I have a quick question involving the artwork from the community use folders. I thought about taking the faction images, making iron on transfers, and then attaching those images to a dice bag in order to make nifty little pathfinder society dice bags.
Is the use of these images acceptable for this (assuming I'm not selling them - just giving them away)? If I do this do I need to include the legal caveat somewhere on the bag?
Chief Technical Officer
|
I have a quick question involving the artwork from the community use folders. I thought about taking the faction images, making iron on transfers, and then attaching those images to a dice bag in order to make nifty little pathfinder society dice bags.
Is the use of these images acceptable for this (assuming I'm not selling them - just giving them away)? If I do this do I need to include the legal caveat somewhere on the bag?
We don't really want to get into the habit of issuing exceptions to the rules... so I'll just point out that if you include a slip of paper inside the dice bag with the required text, that would fulfill your obligation.
|
|
We don't really want to get into the habit of issuing exceptions to the rules... so I'll just point out that if you include a slip of paper inside the dice bag with the required text, that would fulfill your obligation.I have a quick question involving the artwork from the community use folders. I thought about taking the faction images, making iron on transfers, and then attaching those images to a dice bag in order to make nifty little pathfinder society dice bags.
Is the use of these images acceptable for this (assuming I'm not selling them - just giving them away)? If I do this do I need to include the legal caveat somewhere on the bag?
I can do that.
Thanks.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I have a quick question involving the artwork from the community use folders.To Vic or Lisa ...
From reading the FAQ, Guidelines, etc., I presume they apply only to distributed material, and not things I create for personal, unshared, non-distributed fair-use.
For example, the FAQ specifically states that I cannot print one of your maps as a scaled battlemap, but that I can re-create it myself. I presume this applies only if I post the battlemap on my website or otherwise distribute it, and not just use it at the table for myself and my group (as this is what we all know everyone does, anyway).
We've always said that we don't mind people sharing information that's beneficial for running the game within their gaming group, so long as that sharing is done in a way that's not publicly accessible. (However, I do like to remind folks that sharing your watermarked PDFs with your players is still not a good idea, because if they upload them to the internet, it's your identifying information that we'll find. Sharing only excerpts or print copies would be much more wise.)
oh come one! If you are getting a tattoo of some Paizo artwork, you should be man enough to have the Art Community Use contract tattooed on your ass!Does this mean if I get a Tattoo of some of that artwork I have to eat a slip of paper with the legal's on it?
lol! Nice Krome, spoken with true dwarven charm, and I totally agree! :)
Basically, as I read it, Wicht could make a dice-bag for himself and not include the legal text, but if he gives them away to anyone else in his gaming group, much less the general public, he is required to do so.
Also, he can charge to cover the materials cost of the bag, but no more since that would be charging for the artwork (similar to anti-ticket-scalping laws).
As soon as you place a copyrighted image onto something you CAN NOT SELL it LEGALLY unless you have explicit permission(s) from the copyright owner.
((Example: If I started painting Marvel Comics' comicbook characters, then started selling the paintings for high dollar prices, cuz I'm a famous artist(not really just go with it... think Boris Vallejo & Julie Bell) who spent tons of time, money and supplies creating these awesome pictures of Wolverine, Ironman, Hulk, etc. Without Marvel Comics' explicit permission to use the likeness of their copyrighted images, you're looking down the barrel of a potentially huge lawsuit. 'NCSoft' {City of Heroes} and 'Capcom' {Street Fighter ##} are both well aware of this particular nastiness that specifically Marvel is capable of in the past. 'Capcom' has also had it's fair share of legal battles over Street Fighter 2 clones, involving the end result of "Shut your face, you can't copyright a martial arts style."))
This is a "copyright" issue, not a "solicitation" issue(ie: ticket scalping), which is an entirely different problem involving being a business, having a business license, paying taxes, etc.
|
Just to muddle things and to urge anyone walking the treacherous slope of copyright law to consult a lawyer or three...
Copyright law DOES allow fair use exclusions, which are vague at best. This is why so many artists can go to GenCon and sell pictures they have painted of Batman, or Superman, or Wolverine. Not to say that these guys CAN'T be sued, anyone can be sued for anything. But in court one side has to PROVE fair use, while the other has to PROVE that claim actually hurt their copyright and cost them monetarily.
So before doing anything with something copyrighted or trademarked by someone else, it is best to consult a lawyer.
Or just tattoo the image on your ass and when you are in court you can drop your trousers and moon the plaintiffs and judge and not get into real trouble for it!
As for me, I'll be at the LA County Courthouse tomorrow on another matter, but might have time to look into this. Hopefully I can get an answer, with case precedent.
Cool, I look forward to seeing what answers you can dig up. It's likely we have over complicated the issue of "giving your friends presents with an iron-on on them", but an interesting conversation none-the-less.
|
|
As for me, I'll be at the LA County Courthouse tomorrow on another matter, but might have time to look into this. Hopefully I can get an answer, with case precedent.Cool, I look forward to seeing what answers you can dig up. It's likely we have over complicated the issue of "giving your friends presents with an iron-on on them", but an interesting conversation none-the-less.
Well for the OP I think Vic's comments were all that was needed really. The rest of us just like to make things complicated!
|
|
Excellent Hypothetical! I am very interested to hear how this turns out!
Now, here, one could create ones own version of the designs and be somewhat more free, it being your own art. However, the design itself still belongs to Paizo, so again, this is very interesting. Love to hear how people decide on this. Thank you so very much.
so if I take the Andoran logo and put it on a dog t-shirt, where do I put the disclaimer?
Preprint it on a roll of doggy bags? :) Just my opinion of legalese ;p
|
|
LOL, my roommate is having a rough time and is an Andoran fan so I thought a doggie T-shirt to match her own would amuse her.
You could always make a design of the Andoran logo being eaten alive by the Cheliax symbol... hehehehe
Just put the legalese inside the shirt, no one will ever see it that way and you are covered.
|
|
For those more interested in the actual dice bags than the legal discussion (not that its not interesting) I've made two tonight - Qadira and Osirion. Click on the links for photos.
One question for any sewing/art enthusiast out there - Does anyone know of a place to by good quality eyelets? I'm not entirely satisfied with the cheap ones I have at the moment.
For those more interested in the actual dice bags than the legal discussion (not that its not interesting) I've made two tonight - Qadira and Osirion. Click on the links for photos.
One question for any sewing/art enthusiast out there - Does anyone know of a place to by good quality eyelets? I'm not entirely satisfied with the cheap ones I have at the moment.
Those look awesome. I know what you mean about the eyelets. It's really hard to find good ones. I usually just do buttonholes instead.
|
|
Those look awesome. I know what you mean about the eyelets. It's really hard to find good ones. I usually just do buttonholes instead.
I tried to figure out how to do button holes on my wife's machine for a costume my son is wearing to Origins.
I couldn't figure it out and ended up sewing the button holes by hand for her. I wouldn't want to repeat that numerous times for dicebags I'm just planning on giving away. :)
I've made two tonight - Qadira and Osirion. Click on the links for photos.
Consider this my suggestion for Paizo to approach you for a deal to sell your bags. I'd so buy a Qadiran bag. (Not to mention, those bags look better than most of the ones I can purchase.)
Now if only I played in the Society...
Those look awesome. I know what you mean about the eyelets. It's really hard to find good ones. I usually just do buttonholes instead.I tried to figure out how to do button holes on my wife's machine for a costume my son is wearing to Origins.
I couldn't figure it out and ended up sewing the button holes by hand for her. I wouldn't want to repeat that numerous times for dicebags I'm just planning on giving away. :)
I'd try Michael's or Joanne's Fabrics. They should have some in their leatherworking sections that would be of better quality.
|
|
The eyelets I have come from Joanne's but I didn't think of looking to see if they had different ones in the leather section. Michaels is on my list to check out for better eyelets but I don't remember the one near us having any in the leather section either - though their leather section is not all that big.
The eyelets I have come from Joanne's but I didn't think of looking to see if they had different ones in the leather section. Michaels is on my list to check out for better eyelets but I don't remember the one near us having any in the leather section either - though their leather section is not all that big.
It varies per store, but there should be a small leather section near the beads (that's where they hide in the two stores I visit in the San Diego area). It used to be larger when they carried most of the Tandy line, but that seems to be vanishing.
|
|
For those more interested in the actual dice bags than the legal discussion (not that its not interesting) I've made two tonight - Qadira and Osirion. Click on the links for photos.
One question for any sewing/art enthusiast out there - Does anyone know of a place to by good quality eyelets? I'm not entirely satisfied with the cheap ones I have at the moment.
Wow! Those look great!
And I wonder how many we have in the San Diego Area...there's at least 2 north county inland...of each...
I live in Poway, and they have a Michael's and Joanne's in the same strip :) The other one I go to less frequently is over in Carmel Mountain.
|
|
And I wonder how many we have in the San Diego Area...there's at least 2 north county inland...of each...I live in Poway, and they have a Michael's and Joanne's in the same strip :) The other one I go to less frequently is over in Carmel Mountain.
Heh, my wife 'n I have been to the Poway Joann's, we're up in Escondido...(she's a knitter you see...and they were having a sale...)
|
|
The other three 'prototypes' are done. Eight more of each to do. Or at least that's the plan. Click on the links to see the pictures
And thanks guys (and girls) for the kind words. I 'solved' my eyelet problem for the most part by using scissors to cut the initial holes instead of my eyelet pliers. The fabric, I figured out, was too pliable and the pliers were making the holes too big which made the eyelets too loose.
The bags, for those interested, measure about 6 inches by 4.5 inches.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
FIrst up, I'd like to be clear that in this post, I'm speaking about my personal knowledge of copyright law, and not as a representative of Paizo. That is, in this post, I'm sharing stuff I know about the law, but please don't take any of the following as having anything to do with Paizo's position on anything.
One of the most common misconceptions about copyright law is that infringement must involve monetary or other gain. It doesn't. Copyright is literally what it says: the right to copy. If I copyright something, I gain a number of exclusive rights. Chief among them, I gain the exclusive right to make and sell copies of my work, and to make new works based on my work, and the exclusive right to authorize others to do those things with my work.
Generally, if you make copies of something I hold the copyright for, whether you sell them or not, you have violated copyright law.
Now, of course, there are exceptions to this. Most of them are spelled out in sections 107 through 118 of the Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code). They're kind of arcane, but that's the law for you.
Most confusing among these exceptions is the concept of Fair Use. Even the Copyright Office says "The distinction between 'fair use' and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined." The provision for Fair Use includes this bit: "In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include... the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature..." This is the bit that is responsible for many people (wrongly) thinking that it's only a violation if there's commercial gain from it, but it's not the entire law—and it also doesn't actually say "if it's non-commercial, it's ok," or, for that matter, "if it's non-commercial, it's not ok." It's just saying that that's one of several factors to be considered when determining whether a particular use falls under Fair Use. It's really, really not black-and-white—if it were, there would probably be no such thing as copyright attorneys.
Some of the actions folks are talking about above—like the artist selling his drawings of Wolverine—are probably not protected by Fair Use, but rather by another issue: that it doesn't make economic sense for Marvel Comics to go after this guy. (That doesn't make it not a violation, though.)
I'll wrap up with this recommendation from the Copyright Office. It may be the best free legal advice you'll ever get:
The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of “fair use” would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.
Vic's post reminded me of an incident in Southern California (yeah, I know, a large area, but I don't recall which city it happened in) several years back where a pre-school was ordered by Disney to repaint their walls because they were using Disney characters without permission.
A lot of folks jumped on Disney, calling them a big bully and such, and attempting to claim "fair use" since the pre-school was not selling the images. The response from several lawyers was that they were "selling" it in that the images were used in a place of business, and were not the ones that Disney themselves sold, but handpainted art by staff and parents. And because of the art, the pre-school had been written up in the newspaper, and there was commentary about the Disney art ... and so the art was being used in a sense as advertisement. And that is not fair use.
I've always remembered that, because of the cries of Disney being unfair, when they were simply protecting their intellectual property and their own sales of wall posters and such that could be impacted by folks simply doing their own work. Basically what it boiled down to was, yes, you can do it in your private home, where you are not running a business working with kids and not infringe ... but once you move anyone's imagery into a public venue as part of what makes you what you are, if it's not your own images, you infringe.
And nope, I'm not a lawyer, this is just what I recall from the news articles of that time :)
|
|
Vic's post reminded me of an incident in Southern California (yeah, I know, a large area, but I don't recall which city it happened in) several years back where a pre-school was ordered by Disney to repaint their walls because they were using Disney characters without permission.
A lot of folks jumped on Disney, calling them a big bully and such, and attempting to claim "fair use" since the pre-school was not selling the images. The response from several lawyers was that they were "selling" it in that the images were used in a place of business, and were not the ones that Disney themselves sold, but handpainted art by staff and parents. And because of the art, the pre-school had been written up in the newspaper, and there was commentary about the Disney art ... and so the art was being used in a sense as advertisement. And that is not fair use.
I've always remembered that, because of the cries of Disney being unfair, when they were simply protecting their intellectual property and their own sales of wall posters and such that could be impacted by folks simply doing their own work. Basically what it boiled down to was, yes, you can do it in your private home, where you are not running a business working with kids and not infringe ... but once you move anyone's imagery into a public venue as part of what makes you what you are, if it's not your own images, you infringe.
And nope, I'm not a lawyer, this is just what I recall from the news articles of that time :)
This gets into some other issues involving lawsuits against Disney and the government in fact. According to older copyright and patent laws, the rights to Mickey Mouse and others have expired and are now public domain. However, changes later in the laws extended the time for those rights. Many people have sued the government and Disney and such as violating the public trust. In essence the government has set up a system that rights never end, which is in contrast to the legal wording of the laws, by just offering extensions over and over.
Unfortunately, the plaintiffs do not have near the monetary resource, economic clout, and political support needed to fight such a suit. The public domain and trust will always be the last choice when up against a money machine.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Vic's post reminded me of an incident in Southern California (yeah, I know, a large area, but I don't recall which city it happened in) several years back where a pre-school was ordered by Disney to repaint their walls because they were using Disney characters without permission.
A lot of folks jumped on Disney, calling them a big bully and such, and attempting to claim "fair use" since the pre-school was not selling the images. The response from several lawyers was that they were "selling" it in that the images were used in a place of business, and were not the ones that Disney themselves sold, but handpainted art by staff and parents. And because of the art, the pre-school had been written up in the newspaper, and there was commentary about the Disney art ... and so the art was being used in a sense as advertisement. And that is not fair use.
I've always remembered that, because of the cries of Disney being unfair, when they were simply protecting their intellectual property and their own sales of wall posters and such that could be impacted by folks simply doing their own work. Basically what it boiled down to was, yes, you can do it in your private home, where you are not running a business working with kids and not infringe ... but once you move anyone's imagery into a public venue as part of what makes you what you are, if it's not your own images, you infringe.
And nope, I'm not a lawyer, this is just what I recall from the news articles of that time :)
I do recall this case. And here's where it gets unpleasant to be a company that owns copyrights. I personally suspect that nobody at Disney particularly *wanted* to prosecute this preschool. However, copyright and trademark infringement cases often examine precedents, and if it can be proven that Disney was aware of *this* violation and failed to act on it, that potentially weakens their ability to win in a case they *do* care about. It would also weaken their position if they acted on it arbitrarily, such as if they allowed preschool A to do it, but stopped preschool B from doing it.
This is a big part of why Paizo has a Community Use Policy.
so if I take the Andoran logo and put it on a dog t-shirt, where do I put the disclaimer?
Krome already answered this...
oh come one! If you are getting a tattoo of some Paizo artwork, you should be man enough to have the Art Community Use contract tattooed on your ass!
You neatly shave a significant spot on said dog's ass and tattoo it right on that puppy! It'll save you time and money incase you buy more than one T-shirt or the dog ever changes faction.
The other three 'prototypes' are done. Eight more of each to do. Or at least that's the plan. Click on the links to see the pictures
And thanks guys (and girls) for the kind words. I 'solved' my eyelet problem for the most part by using scissors to cut the initial holes instead of my eyelet pliers. The fabric, I figured out, was too pliable and the pliers were making the holes too big which made the eyelets too loose.
The bags, for those interested, measure about 6 inches by 4.5 inches.
Very nice bags ya got there Wicht!
45 of them?! Holy cow, that seems like alot of work for gifts. I kind of wish I knew that many (local)people who played Pathfinder Society. *jealous*
Vic's post reminded me of an incident in Southern California (yeah, I know, a large area, but I don't recall which city it happened in) several years back where a pre-school was ordered by Disney to repaint their walls because they were using Disney characters without permission.
I was previously going to post of similar incidents, but wasn't really sure it was a close enough topic...
It makes me wonder how many of these incidents are just "Urban Legend" at this point.
I do recall this case. And here's where it gets unpleasant to be a company that owns copyrights. I personally suspect that nobody at Disney particularly *wanted* to prosecute this preschool. However, copyright and trademark infringement cases often examine precedents, and if it can be proven that Disney was aware of *this* violation and failed to act on it, that potentially weakens their ability to win in a case they *do* care about. It would also weaken their position if they acted on it arbitrarily, such as if they allowed preschool A to do it, but stopped preschool B from doing it.
Yea, I could see that putting a bit a cramp in Disney's style. That would make my area's (4+ schools) Annual Halloween window painting contest(on downtown retailer's store windows) a much more difficult event.
On the same note, I haven't heard of that particular situation until just now. Though it could be because I don't pay alot of attention to the media or that I live in Pennsylvania which sometimes seems worlds apart. *points* That's a Philly Soft Pretzel, a Philly Cheese Steak and a Tasty Kake... and our Crabs(Atlantic ocean) wear green/blue spiked chitin armor, not red/orange!
----------------------------
Sorry for the machine gun posting, I didn't feel like opening multiple windows to quote various people in one large post. ;p