[thelist] Ethical issues concerning re-use (and heavy modification) of images

Liam Delahunty ldelahunty at britstream.com
Thu May 9 08:11:01 CDT 2002

<Liam> What do people change and sell as their own? </Liam>

We could start with the automobile, the combustion engine, the photocopiers,
the cpu, the modem, all of these things with small twists and each holding

As you acknowledge those are patents not copyright. Quite different
concepts, and the original discussion pertains to copyright.

As for copyrights the line gets a little wavey...  Using the scale of A
minor with a 4/4 time does not a Buddy Holly re-make make, nor would the use
of the C Shaped Grande Barr Chord mean you'd have to pay Stevey Ray Vaughn's
estate. Likewise in art we needen't (should they still be eligable but for
lack of better example) pay the VanGough estate every time we use burnt
sienna in an oil paining.

Now that's just being silly! ;P There is no copyright on the scales, chords,
colours, etc. The copyright is on the final product, the music, the image.
Though there may well be a patent on the burnt sienna chemical composition
to stop me from making and selling my own.

If I was to take a sample from a Buddy Holly record I could not use it
without the copyright holders permission. (This is further complicated by
the fact that music copyright expires  - I think 75 years after the death of
the immediate next of kin of the composer.) If I were to photograph a Van
Gough I would probably need permission from the estate to publish it.

Kind regards,

More information about the thelist mailing list