Stevertigo wrote:
page..... ) it should be fair game.. especially if you
know the
original source, and... if you modify the image a bit
yourself... Look at the Redd Foxx portrait which i merged from two
crappier photos I found on the web...
This is almost certainly a useless activity. Merging two photos into
one doesn't reduce the copyright problems, it compounds them. The new
work would be a "derived work" from both the originals, and a
violation of the copyright on both of the originals.
neither one of these can directly be tied to this one,
and theirs
were rip- offs anyway...
"I ripped it off from someone who ripped off the original copyright
holder" is not a valid defense.
But either way, Ive run across a few images that were
questionable
in origin, and the solution to removing any tie to the original is
to modify the image...
This solves absolutely nothing.
A company I worked for was engaged in the shady
business of scanning
other peoples high-end catalogs for use of the images on the
web. After consulting a lawyer, who said that it was ok to use the
images provided there were seven changes made to them... seven
degrees of removal from the original... I don't know if this holds
water well enough for here.. (Most places dont worry at all...)
but... in the strictest sense, its not hard to alter a photo with a
few different operations...
This is just wrong. I strongly encourage people not to follow this
kind of advice here.
--Jimbo