Quote:
Originally Posted by d-null
imagine a scenario if many people in this forum have posted a pic or used a picture they didn't own as an avatar, and if the photographer that took that original pic showed up at their place of work or home with a video camera and demanded big money for it, same concept isn't it?
|
Not really, no.
There are several provisions allowing for permissible use of copyrighted works, and one is 'fair use' which allows for reviews as well as creation of new works among other things. One provision of fair use is that the size of the content being used must be minor compared to the original copyrighted work - such as a single frame still or image being used for a lot of avatars, but also a lot of the gifs you see. However, if the avatar in question represents the entirety of another copyrighted work such as a famous photo or painting, then that could be considered a violation of the original works copyright. But then other factors would come into play, such as does the avatar reduce the original works value and the authors ability to market it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBottomTooth
Well within his rights, but was kind of a dick move to post the video on the internet. What's the law on filming on a private business property? They should have asked him to turn the camera off.
|
If the offices are open to the public and there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, then it's completely legal. If the newspaper guy had asked him into his office to hold the conversation behind closed doors, then that would be a different matter altogether.