![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bladesparkIf I hear one more person say "It's perfectly legal to make your own art/stories/costumes/other copy of a copyrighted character, so long as you're not doing it for profit" I am going to SCREAM.
No.
It's not.
Okay?
Not flipping legal.
There are two ways in which it is legal to copy a copyrighted character. 1. It's a case that falls under "fair use" which means you are copying it to discuss, parody, critique, study, etc. 2. You have been given permission by the copyright owner.
Those are the ONLY CASES EVER, okay? If you do not have permission, THEN YOU CAN'T USE IT. There is no law that says "If you're not making money, you can copy copyrighted stuff in any way you please." Okay? NO SUCH LAW.
Some owners have given their fans blanket permission to use their work for non commercial purposes. But just because Mercedes Lackey has said her fans have her permission to make Valdemar fan art doesn't mean that making Harry Potter fan art is okay. It doesn't work like that, so quit telling me it does. (I'm fairly certainly Rowling has also given blanket permission, but I KNOW of some authors who HAVE sued their own fans over making fan art. It has happened, so don't assume it won't, go find out.)
Breaking copyright on art for personal use rather than for profit means three things:
1. You're less likely to get caught at it.
2. The copyright owner may not bother to sue you, since you're not directly harming their income, and
3. If you do get sued, you won't be fined as much money when* you lose as you would have been if you'd been doing it for profit.
These things don't make it legal. They make it possible to get away with it most of the time, but just because most of the time you're not driving past a speed trap, that doesn't make speeding legal!
Sheesh. If you want to take the risk, feel free. Plenty of people do, and they usually don't get in trouble. But for the love of small furry things, quit telling me that it's legal when it's not!
(Pardon my recent spate of ranty posts. I'm under a great deal of personal stress just now, so it's sort of leaking out in the form of a total lack of patience with things like this.)
*I say "when" because the only cases I have ever heard of where the infringer beat a copyright lawsuit are cases involving music, which is an entirely different area of copyright law. If you have drawn a million Lion King characters, and Disney takes you to court, what exactly is your defense going to be? They're obviously characters belonging to Disney, you obviously didn't have permission to use them, so what are you going to say? "But I never made any money doing it" doesn't get you anywhere, legally speaking, so if that's your only argument, you will lose the suit. And "But I changed this one's hair to green, he's my own original character now" also doesn't hold water. Sorry. The "change it 10%" rule is as much of a myth as the "personal use is okay" rule. If somebody looks at it and goes "Looks like Simba" then you're screwed. You have to change something enough that it's no longer recognizable as the original in order to be legal, and once you've done that it's no longer copying, is it? It's just inspiration. Like the Fizzkit.
http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/dark/fizzgig.jpg <--Fizzgig
http://sparkcostumes.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=106&pos=9 <--Fizzkit
You're going to look at the Fizzkit and go "that kind of reminds me of Fizzgig" but you're not going to go "That IS Fizzgig" because Fizzgig didn't have a tail, or ears, and did have a nose, and was rounder, and... etc. Taking inspiration is fine. Copying isn't. End of story. So the next person who tells me it's legal to break copyright for personal use is going to get whapped upside the head with a haddock.
No.
It's not.
Okay?
Not flipping legal.
There are two ways in which it is legal to copy a copyrighted character. 1. It's a case that falls under "fair use" which means you are copying it to discuss, parody, critique, study, etc. 2. You have been given permission by the copyright owner.
Those are the ONLY CASES EVER, okay? If you do not have permission, THEN YOU CAN'T USE IT. There is no law that says "If you're not making money, you can copy copyrighted stuff in any way you please." Okay? NO SUCH LAW.
Some owners have given their fans blanket permission to use their work for non commercial purposes. But just because Mercedes Lackey has said her fans have her permission to make Valdemar fan art doesn't mean that making Harry Potter fan art is okay. It doesn't work like that, so quit telling me it does. (I'm fairly certainly Rowling has also given blanket permission, but I KNOW of some authors who HAVE sued their own fans over making fan art. It has happened, so don't assume it won't, go find out.)
Breaking copyright on art for personal use rather than for profit means three things:
1. You're less likely to get caught at it.
2. The copyright owner may not bother to sue you, since you're not directly harming their income, and
3. If you do get sued, you won't be fined as much money when* you lose as you would have been if you'd been doing it for profit.
These things don't make it legal. They make it possible to get away with it most of the time, but just because most of the time you're not driving past a speed trap, that doesn't make speeding legal!
Sheesh. If you want to take the risk, feel free. Plenty of people do, and they usually don't get in trouble. But for the love of small furry things, quit telling me that it's legal when it's not!
(Pardon my recent spate of ranty posts. I'm under a great deal of personal stress just now, so it's sort of leaking out in the form of a total lack of patience with things like this.)
*I say "when" because the only cases I have ever heard of where the infringer beat a copyright lawsuit are cases involving music, which is an entirely different area of copyright law. If you have drawn a million Lion King characters, and Disney takes you to court, what exactly is your defense going to be? They're obviously characters belonging to Disney, you obviously didn't have permission to use them, so what are you going to say? "But I never made any money doing it" doesn't get you anywhere, legally speaking, so if that's your only argument, you will lose the suit. And "But I changed this one's hair to green, he's my own original character now" also doesn't hold water. Sorry. The "change it 10%" rule is as much of a myth as the "personal use is okay" rule. If somebody looks at it and goes "Looks like Simba" then you're screwed. You have to change something enough that it's no longer recognizable as the original in order to be legal, and once you've done that it's no longer copying, is it? It's just inspiration. Like the Fizzkit.
http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/dark/fizzgig.jpg <--Fizzgig
http://sparkcostumes.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=106&pos=9 <--Fizzkit
You're going to look at the Fizzkit and go "that kind of reminds me of Fizzgig" but you're not going to go "That IS Fizzgig" because Fizzgig didn't have a tail, or ears, and did have a nose, and was rounder, and... etc. Taking inspiration is fine. Copying isn't. End of story. So the next person who tells me it's legal to break copyright for personal use is going to get whapped upside the head with a haddock.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 03:30 pm (UTC)I mean, fanart is usually pretty safe unless it's for profit, but like you said, it's safe as in they're likely not gonna care, not that it's legal.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 05:19 pm (UTC)Nooooooo... it's not. My Red costume is a fugitive. It's highly, highly, HIGHLY unlikely that anyone would eve be charged (I don't think it's ever happened), but it's certainly not LEGAL.
no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-17 09:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-04-18 12:49 am (UTC)Actually, selling hacked/remixed Barbies
Date: 2008-04-20 03:13 pm (UTC)cosplaying
Date: 2008-04-18 10:45 pm (UTC)That's my cosplay point of view.
Re: cosplaying
Date: 2008-04-18 10:59 pm (UTC)You say this as though I don't know what cosplay is. I assure you, I am quite familiar with it.
You also say this as though putting money, blood and sweat into your illegal costume legalizes it.
And further, you say this as though $200 is a lot of money for a costume. I'm sorry to break this to you, but it's not. Ask the next fursuiter you see how much their fursuit cost. As the next historical re-enactor you find how much their costume cost.
Well, actually, according to Steve Hickman
Date: 2008-04-20 03:12 pm (UTC)Thus you have networks and studios and gaming companies now trademarking characters, (Captain Kirk™) in order to avail themselves of a different set of legal protections, in order to license derivative works for profit and/or control their public image. So some fanart is illegal, and some isn't. It depends.
And then there's the whole Fair Use/parody situation, which is not particularly cut-and-dried (which is one reason for authors/networks to stay away from trying to enforce it, because it might not go entirely as they wish (http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16230) (quite apart from the whole Look Like Jerks/alienate our most loyal customers aspect), - and profit-making status does make a difference when it comes to Fair Use, and parody can be sold for profit, so...
Not as simple as that - but then it rarely is.