I have a copyright question.
I sell art at conventions, I wanted to maybe also start selling my photography of figurines and sell them in hand tags......I was told that was a copyright issue.
Even told by cosplayers who sell their own prints of themselves as licensed characters.....
Can an expert explain to me why I can sell a drawing of Sonico but I CANT sell my photo of a Sonico figure?
How can I not when cosplayers do basically the same thing in cosplay?
Pictures related not my photo but an example of what I'd do, look up "anime figure photography" to get an idea, it's not just a figure with a blank background.
that's all violating copyright laws, somebody was nice enough to tell you what is tolerated and what is not. don't get indignant, listen.
I was mostly wondering if it still falls under "fair use"
>>17323094
>that's all violating copyright laws
explain
I just want to know the differences between what I brought up and why this photography isnt fair use
>>17323090
the action figures themselves are patented. just like the character.
so pictures of the action figures would be reproducing something that is patented. everything about the figures is owned by the company.
whereas a costume is not. especially if hte cosplay is hand made and not bought from a licensed company. there is no evidence that it is 100% wihtout a doubt the character from the anime or video game. whereas the toy is 100% without a doubt that toy.
>>17323113
What about when people take photos of Disney parks or buildings and such like roller coasters? Arnt things like that still copy righted?
>>17323121
Depends. Are they selling them or putting them in family albums?
>>17323133
profit doesnt matter, something that is fair use is still legal to sell
>>17323121
thats legal, buildings and such are allowed to be photographed and sold. the same way if you step outside you are allowed to be photographed and sold.
you could likely sell these at conventions and not get any trouble. they have no reason to care. its the same reason those porno mangas get sold. its kind of like letting your music be used on youtube. ultimately it only helps popularity. as long as you arent competing by creating say, bootleg toys, they have no reason to attack you.
but legally, they could. at most they'd send a cease and desist. but what you are doing is illegal.
two examples
>robot chicken
They have very strict rules about what hteir stproes are allowed to be about because it can't just be random and fun. it has to be commentary on the source material otherwise they will get sued for using those toys. each skit has to poke fun at something about the show itself. not just be the original show with lots of jokes.
another example is a show called
>rick adn steve the happiest gay couple in all the world.
They used a bunch of lego like toys to create a stop motion animation TV series. mind you none of these were constructed like the original box designs. heavy edits. btu they still got sued over using them and were forced to switch to a separate toy line that gave them permission.
>>17323144
>profit doesn't matter
profit absolutely matters. 100% it matters.
you are allowed to photograph anything you want for yourself. you can burn as many copies of a dvd you own as you want. you can legally even download / torrent a product htat you already own on dvd.
but if you SEED it, you are re distributing it, and that is when it gets illegal. if you hand out those photos to people, that is illegal. if you charge people for the photos, that is especially illegal.
profit DOES matter you twat.
