Does all these infringe copyright?

[Harry Potter]

I saw a photo that has nice composition. I copy the way the photo is composed and apply in my shooting style.

I saw a professional photographer posed a model which I think is very creative. I copy the way he posed her and ask my model to do the same.

I saw how a professional setup and arrange the subjects. I copy it and also setup the same settings.

Do all these infringe copyrights? I'm not saying I did them, I'm just asking.

 

[akababy]

i dun think so. If it does then i believe events like national day will have the whole singapore at the floating stage sueing one another.

 

[velasco]

nope.

you are inspired so you emulate. nothing wrong i guess, just perceptions from people towards your work then

 

[CYRN]

technically, if you setup the shoot yourself, it should not constitute a voilation in copyright...

 

[355Rossa]

I saw a photo that has nice composition. I copy the way the photo is composed and apply in my shooting style.

I saw a professional photographer posed a model which I think is very creative. I copy the way he posed her and ask my model to do the same.

I saw how a professional setup and arrange the subjects. I copy it and also setup the same settings.

Do all these infringe copyrights? I'm not saying I did them, I'm just asking.

if we do not copy composition/pose/setup, how do we learn?
infringement of copyrights is another issue. google it, too much to explain in a forum...

 

[Anson]

We need lawyers here... :bsmilie:

 

[vince123123]

Cheemalogy.

 

[mfbatzap]

No unless you take/steal the photog's picture and submit as yours.
Or, you took/stole his picture, edited it and submit as yours.
Otherwise I don't think it is considered as copyright.

 

[barracuda88]

Nope, don't think it is an infringement.

But using that Pocoyo pic as your icon without permission from the Spanish TV company that created it may ended up in court... :bsmilie:

 

[kandinsky]

Do all these infringe copyrights? I'm not saying I did them, I'm just asking.

Don't think so. If those are infringements, anyone grabbing his/her crotch with a loud "Hoo Huuuu!" could stand to get sued by Michael Jackson :bsmilie:

What is Not Protected by Copyright?

Subject matter not protected by copyright include:

* ideas (e.g. a new business idea that has not been documented);
* concepts (e.g. an idea for a new game show that has not been written down);
* discoveries (e.g. a research finding that has not been known before);
* procedures (e.g. the steps involved when applying for a travel visa);
* methods (e.g. the unique solution to a mathematical problem);
* subject matter that has not been made tangible in a recording or writing (e.g. a speech or a dance that has not been written or recorded); and
* subject matter which is not of original authorship (e.g. works which contain information in the public domain such as standards and the like).

http://www.ipos.gov.sg/leftNav/cop/

 

[MRSAMO]

Copying other people is boring, don't you have your own style? Ever seen American Idol? Individuality is the key!

 

[Rashkae]

if we do not copy composition/pose/setup, how do we learn?

You don't learn from copying. All you do is admit that you have no creativity, no individuality, no imagination and no ability to create something new and fresh. You are only a Xerox machine, churning out the same stuff everyone does, with no style or direction of your own.

 

[aryanto]

Seriously if this is a copy right violation then drivers license and IC photo will violate copyright law long long time LOL.
You can copy how other peoples take photo. Learn by example is a good way of learning and improving your skill. But dont just get stuck there. Learn and move on. Invent your own style when your skill has improved.

 

[Blur Shadow]

In my limited understanding of the law, no, there is no infringement. Because there is no intellectual property that was infringed upon in the first place.

 

[aryanto]

it is a copyright infrigement if you take photo of another photographer's photo, or artist paintings, but... not statues cos er, statue is 3D and photo is 2D. LOL

 

[jtchoy]

Of course not!

If you make a copy of their photo and claim its yours, then that is infringement of copyright...

 

[vince123123]

Eh you sure that the legal position is that there is no infringement just because 3D becomes 2D or 2D becomes 3D?

Take a look at King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleeman Ltd [1941] AC 417 which held that the right of reproduction in any material form would cover a reproduction of two dimensional sketches into three dimensional toys.

This concept is enshrined in the Copyright Act under Section 15(3).

it is a copyright infrigement if you take photo of another photographer's photo, or artist paintings, but... not statues cos er, statue is 3D and photo is 2D. LOL

 

[vince123123]

The answer to the TS's question is not an easy one, but the case of Spectravest Inc v Aperknit Ltd may be helpful; where the court mentioned the following points:

(1) Reproduction does not require exact replication

(2) It is permissible to use anothers' work so long as the essential features and substance is not taken with minor or inconsequential variations.

(3) The issue is wehtehr there is such a degree of similarity between the salient features of the two works that the one can eb said to be a reproduction of the other.

(4) In deciding whether a substantial part has been taken, the focus must primariliy be directed to the part which is said to have been reproduced, and not to the parts which have not.

In that case, what happened was that the plaintiff had a work featuring cats wearing boots in a variety of positions. The defendant made a work featuring dogs wearing boots in a variety of positions. There is a lot of analysis which I think is not suitable for full posting in this forum but the end result was that there was reproduction of the work.

My own personal view is that this question is not an easy question, and if anyone needs an affirmative answer (say he wants to do someting like this for a big commercial project; it is better pay the dough and seek a lawyer's advice before proceeding).

 

[zoossh]

I saw a photo that has nice composition. I copy the way the photo is composed and apply in my shooting style.

I saw a professional photographer posed a model which I think is very creative. I copy the way he posed her and ask my model to do the same.

I saw how a professional setup and arrange the subjects. I copy it and also setup the same settings.

Do all these infringe copyrights? I'm not saying I did them, I'm just asking.

are you using it in a commerical ground or do you intend to send it up for publishing or competition? i think that makes the single most important difference.

 

[cabbySHE]

Nope, don't think it is an infringement.

But using that Pocoyo pic as your icon without permission from the Spanish TV company that created it may ended up in court... :bsmilie:

That's a good one !