[thelist] quote from Webmonkey site re: copyrighted images

[Michael Knepher]

----- Original Message -----
From: "spinhead" <evolt at spinhead.com>

> Reading a bit about graphics at Webmonkey, I came across this line:
>
> "To use an image from the Web, you must either first get permission from
the
> original owner or edit the image beyond recognition. "
>
> How true is the second half? Can I really take someone else's graphic,
edit
> it until it's no longer recognizable, and use it? Doesn't copyright cover
> derived works?
>
> I'm not trolling for 'stealing is bad' comments, I'm wondering if anyone
has
> genuine authoritative info on that exact technical condition (because I'm
> curious, not because I'm planning it; I know enough artists who owe me
> favors that I'll never need to do my own graphics again.)
>

Without seeing the context, I'd expect the second statement may be a bit
tongue-in-cheek on Webmonkey's part. After all, if you're going to take
someone else's image and truly edit it beyond recognition, there's really no
point in stealing that image to begin with, right? You could just as easily
start from scratch.

It's sort of like stealing the Mona Lisa, but to avoid being caught, you
paint a seascape over it so no one knows you stole the Mona Lisa.

But hey, now you have the Mona Lisa in your living room. Enjoy it. ;o)

In any case, copyright would indeed cover any derivative works (except in
the case of the Mona Lisa, which is in the public domain, though any
secondary images of it would be owned by the particular
photographer/artist).

Michael Knepher