Copyright law art,

[Eeneymush]

Hi, I am sure this has been asked before but can't find a difinative answer,

I am an amatur artist and have taken a photo from google images which i have then manipulated with my paint programme on my computer, pretty much beyond what the original looked like,

I would like to enter a competition and show the paintings but have no idea if, A, that's allowed, B whether I would be committing fraud, or, C whether I would be allowed to see any of the pieces..

obviously, any advice, help comments always welcome

Thank you in anticipation, Eeney,

[Zacs-Master]

I'd have a look at the competition rules. Is it a painting competition or a photographic one.

[factor-fiction]

In addition to the rules of the Art Competition there is the issue of whether the images are copyright free or royalty free.
Some of the issues discussed here regarding that aspect may be useful:
http://blog.2createaw...ur-website-illegally/

[Mosaic]

I think you're looking at two issues. Firstly, the defence of copyright is done by the originator. So most people are not in a position to do squat about copyright. Big corporations are. So find out who owns the image you started with - if it's Lil O'lady from Tottington, drop an email asking permission to reference it as the starting point for your artwork. If you cannot locate an owner, state this in the 'further information' about your artwork with a little sweet sentence saying you have attempted to locate them. If the owner is Getty images, fill out one of their online permission applications and find your credit card. They will charge you. But not as much as they will charge you if they catch you using without asking.
Secondly, you say the finished piece is 'pretty much beyond' the original's appearance. This is delicate ground. How much beyond - be serious. Could Edvard Muench actually stand in front of your work and recognise his from it if your starting point was 'the Scream?'
All artwork draws from things we see - it's impossible for the world we see to be copyrighted - so how like the original is it, how necessary is it to reference the original in the submitted piece - an area only you can comment on.

[Eeneymush]

Ok, firstly, thank you for all your help thus far, and it seems that it won't be a simple yes no answer..... i will attempt a bit of clarity here and hope that helps a bit more, there are no competition rules regarding copyrighting so in realistic terms I am free to enter the pieces either for sale or not for sale,

The images were taken from Google images and I have no way of contacting the person who took the original.. I've tried...Mosaic, think you're right, if all else fails I will footnote the original and leave it at that...

So, imagine a black and white photo of a homeless person on the streets, I take away everything, background, other people, walls etc leaving the basic 'shape' of the crouched beggar which i then distort with colour so it ends up quite 'pop art' there is very little left of the original but am still wracked by guilt that the photo doesn't belong to me...

I really hope that makes some sense, here is the web address of one site that I have some works on, it might help... http://neeney.deviantart.com/

Again, any help more than welcome, competition not until Nov but need to make decisions soon, Thanks again, Eeeny

[shoota]

Could you not pose a friend in a similar situation then manipulate your own image?
Then you would be using the image you have as inspiration only.

[ABerrant]

Is the image being used for commercial purposes?

http://www.redbubble....ple/eeney/shop/recent

[Mosaic]

Good 'homeless person' photos have often been taken by photo journalists, so you might get someone coming to you regarding copyright. Which would be absolutely fine, as you have done all you could to source the owner, and at no point have you intended to defraud them or represent their work as your own - this is the crucial point about copyright.
Let's take the best and yet worst case scenario ie your work goes mega and is franchised on a gazillion t-shirts, mugs, posters, tea towels and projected onto the side of office blocks in London (might happen...)
Then Leni Riefenstahl's hitherto unknown lovechild pops up and claims damages this as part of his estate.....you have evidence that you did not intend to defraud said estate but made efforts to discover the owner, so while they can expect a reasonable cut of profits they can't sue you for trying to take their property (the image) and use it as you would your own property.

On the other hand, if your work does not go mega, but somehow a legitimate owner of the original image pops up, all they can ask is a consideration for use of the image or for the resultant work to be withdrawn (and very good luck with that, once it's gone online). You can't be sued for what you haven't got.

I'm suggesting you totally do this competition and reference the source you got it from, then see what happens next.

[Essell]

If I were to copy an early, almost unknown Kandinski for my own pleasure, that would be fine.
If I put it up for sale titled ' After Kandinski' that would be fine because the buyer would know it was a copy of Kandinski.
If I signed it and didn't acknowledge Kandinski that would be intellectual theft.

Recently a magazine carried an article by an art teacher who saw a picture in a home catalogue. It was recognisably her own composition even though it had been altered considerably. She contacted the catalogue company, took the catalogue 'artist' to court and was awarded all costs and a 5 figure sum in compensation. Or it might have been a 6 figure sum - cannot quite recall.
It was sheer coincidence that the painting was recognised by the original artist. You take your own chances.

[Buenchico]

Everything you need to know:
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy.htm

Chris

[Eeneymush]

Hi gang thanks again for your help with this one...

Shoota - good idea, not a photographer but yes worth a shot and would take away the fear of being prosecuted..

Abberant - yes, hope to see the works, ither at thepetiton or on sites like redbubble...

Moaic - can you explain a little more in playschool speak?, 'a legitimate owner of the original image pops up, all they can ask is a consideration for use of the image or for the resultant work to be withdrawn (and very good luck with that, once it's gone online). You can't be sued for what you haven't got'.

Eesell - thanks, quite scary hence the question egarding legality, though the possibility of anyone claiming ownership, at least i'm trying to get as much advice as possible before i go ahead ith the comptition...

Chris, v thanks for this, will read through when have a mo, it appears at first glance very complex...

Thanks again all...

Eeney