How much editing would I need to do on a copyrighted image before it becomes mine? Meaning...

How much editing would I need to do on a copyrighted image before it becomes mine? Meaning, I have the rights to sell it and do whatever I want with the modified image.

100%

It would have to be "transformative", meaning that your efforts and contributions truly eclipse the original image. If you show both to a guy on the streets he shouldn't conclude that one was just a knock-off of the other, but that both are artistic works in their own right. Mere "editing" usually doesn't cut it.

Your edits are probably artistic enough to give you your own copyright for the edits - you just can't sell them without obtaining the rights to the underlying image as well (the same way translators create a work of their own, but still need permission of the original author to publish it).

You can't just edit an image and have it magically become your property. Pic related is a heavily editing photo of Obama taken by the AP, the guy who edited it was sued for copyright infringement.

"Fair Use" is very specific and doesn't apply to just photoshopping an image.

Depends on what country you are operating from

>"How dare you infringe upon our PROPERTY to spread our communist message of hope and change by using our Fuhrer Obama... heh enjoy the lawsuit...kid."

This is why dems need to be gassed

>How dare a company that only owns news articles and photographs enforce its copyright
Are you autistic or just stupid?

>It would have to be "transformative",
Why isn't this transformative? How much editing needs to be done? What if Obama was made of polygons instead of shaded in

You'd have to consult with a copyright lawyer to get a useful answer.

Maybe show us something

As a man who has never ventured off /b/ before in over 10 years except to look at your fucking normies, why the fuck are you people so fucking god damn normal what thee fuck. ITs like sitting in a coffee shop or some shit watching you fucks go back and forth

>Been on b for 10 years
>Calls himself a """"""""man""""""""

You are a manchild at best. Mentally stunted failure of a human being realistically

It doesn't take his photograph and turns it into something new. It's still his fucking photograph, just weirdly coloured. If you look at the picture it's relatively obvious that it's very derivative and in many essential aspects just a straight-up copy of the original photograph.

Worth mentioning that the parties settled out of court, albeit only after the judge pretty much outright stated he didn't think it was fair use.

>What if Obama was made of polygons instead of shaded in
Well, have you creaded the polygons yourself or did you just let an algorithm run across the pre-existing picture?

What if you created the algorithm?

Then you have a copyright on the algorithm and perhaps a shared copyright on the images it creates under your control together with the original artist of the pictures you feed in.

Think about it this way: What if you wrote a book and then I came along and wrote an algorithm that changed every name and colored every other sentence red. Can I know legally sell your book? Of fucking course not! I'm just taking your work and altering it in minor ways without creating something substantially new myself. I can only take your book as a broad inspiration and build an entirely new story from scratch or perhaps take elements from it and mash them up so that the new whole is something entirely different than the individual parts.

>did you just let an algorithm run across the pre-existing picture?

Yeah.

I didn't realize /b/ was anyone's home board in 2017. Does it even produce OC anymore?

>you just can't sell them without obtaining the rights to the underlying image as well (the same way translators create a work of their own, but still need permission of the original author to publish it).

What if I edit the original picture way over the point where not even the photographer can recognize it, and I don't directly sell it but instead I use it as part of a product that I'm selling, like the cover art for a song/album?
Does that count as selling as well?

What about using it for a song that I give away for free?
Do I have to pay the original photographer for the money I earned thanks to the exposure gained from releasing the song for free (with the cover art made with his picture)?

100%
Oh you thought you could just nig it out and it becomes yours?

>muh politics
Gas yourself instead Cletus

>What if Obama was made of polygons instead of shaded in

Then you're getting into a grey area. My suggestion for you is: if it's "editing" and not "creating" then it's not different enough.

Also in the specific example: the composition is very similar to the original, the expression on Obama's face is very similar. Having said that it would have never have been a legal issue if the derivative image didn't become a meme - no money, no thanks. Now if Obama wasn't a politician but a celebrity or a private citizen he'd probably have a right to claim royalties too!

>What if I edit the original picture way over the point where not even the photographer can recognize it, and I don't directly sell it but instead I use it as part of a product that I'm selling, like the cover art for a song/album?
>Does that count as selling as well?
"Why bother?" is my question. Why not just make something original? You telling me you don't have a phone with a camera?

>What about using it for a song that I give away for free?
Do it until you get a C&D

not unless you consider facebook fap threads OC

christ whats the source to that, sorry I can't help with the thread though.

>"Why bother?" is my question. Why not just make something original? You telling me you don't have a phone with a camera?
I'm not very good at visual arts and this is the only thing that I think looks cool that's also original and unique.
I can't just use any picture for them, since I need high quality photos of certain subjects that I can't photograph at all (let alone take a GOOD photo of them), so the only way is to use other people's pictures.

>Do it until you get a C&D
That's my plan kek
Although I'm starting to look into free pictures that I'm allowed to edit (like on unsplash), but sometimes I find copyrighted photos that are just too good to pass, so I'm willing to take the risk.

Aino Kishi

>What if I edit the original picture way over the point where not even the photographer can recognize it
Everything's legal if you don't get caught.

...

thank you. i love you. heterosexually.

Fuckin' Source?

Shit nevermind....