 |
05-11-2003, 10:47 PM
|
#1
|
|
SOG Member
Featured in Int'l Artist
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,416
|
Public domain
I had no idea where to post this question, and can't believe it hasn't been addressed, but I found nothing in the search mode.
I am curious about the issue of "public domain" and the master's old paintings. An example would be - there must be a Plastic Surgery group in every city with DiVinci's sketch of man in the circle used in their logo.
I am developing a logo and would like to use a value sketch from a painting by Lejeune painted in 1869. Is this legal?
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 12:20 PM
|
#2
|
|
Inactive
Joined: Jan 2002
Location: Siloam Springs, AR
Posts: 911
|
Beth
A logo in America done of a work 140 years old - even altered from the original is probably fine. Americans can't keep huge businesses from copying videos overseas today. You could change it enough to call it your own and you'd surely be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 08:40 PM
|
#3
|
|
SOG & FORUM OWNER
Joined: Jun 2001
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Posts: 2,129
|
I always liked Tim Chambers logo, which I believe he drew himself: http://timothychambers.com
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 10:09 PM
|
#4
|
|
SOG Member
FT Professional
'04 Merit Award PSA
'04 Best Portfolio PSA
'03 Honors Artists Magazine
'01 Second Prize ASOPA
Perm. Collection- Ntl. Portrait Gallery
Perm. Collection- Met
Leads Workshops
Joined: May 2002
Location: Great Neck, NY
Posts: 1,093
|
Ask a laywer
What other artists think is beside the point. You need to get a bona fide legal opinion.
If a lawer who represents himself has a fool for a client, what could be said about an artist asking another artist for legal advice?
By the way, even if a painting is in the public domain, whoever took the photo owns the copyright for the image in the photo. How nuts is that?
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 10:57 PM
|
#5
|
|
SOG Member
Featured in Int'l Artist
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,416
|
Thanks all, I do know we have some good attorneys here, so hopefully they will know.
I think in addition to the photo copyright, things could vary based on who owns the collection.
But as Tim advised it is changed enough that I doubt it will be recognized.
Darn, Marvin - I thought we artists knew everything! 
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 11:21 PM
|
#6
|
|
CAFE & BUSINESS MODERATOR
SOG Member
FT Professional
Joined: Jul 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,460
|
I'm not an attorney (ask Linda Brandon) and I don't even play one on TV, but I have researched copyright issues extensively.
If there is even the slightest chance that the image is copyrighted, you shouldn't use it, even if you modify it substantially. Check out the copyright threads to see what risks you're running.
|
|
|
|
|
05-12-2003, 11:30 PM
|
#7
|
|
STUDIO & HISTORICAL MODERATOR
Joined: Apr 2002
Location: Southern Pines, NC
Posts: 487
|
Besides all of the above, don't you think it would be more relevant if the value-study was from your own hand?
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing this Topic: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:47 AM.
|
Linear Mode
