Quote:

Wrong.
Copyright is absoulutely NOT flexible when it comes to artwork.
This is exactly what copyright is intended to protect: the ability of a person to commercialize their own work and prevent others from commercially benefiting from their works without their permission.

Bottom Line: The only person that has the right to reproduce a work is the copyright holder. Period.


Quote:


Title 17, Chapter 5: Copyright Infringement and Remedies
§ 501. Infringement of copyright3
(a) Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 or of the author as provided in section 106A(a), or who imports copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of section 602, is an infringer of the copyright or right of the author, as the case may be.
[...]


§ 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works36
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;
[...]




If you don't believe this, handpaint a picture of Mario, put it on a T-shirt, and sell them in front of Nintendo's office... see what happens.



You extrmem example is silly. But, you can indeed handpaint a picture of mario and sell it as your own artwork.

Even more interesting, its perfectly legal to take a photograph of ANOTHER photograph, and claim it as your own work and sell it as such. This has been done by at least one notorius photographer, and he hasnt been stopped legally.

So yes, copyright is indeed flexible when it comes to actual artwork. You can copy whatever you want and sell it as your own work, as long as you didnt use mechanical measn to make a carbon copy of copyrighted art. This doesnt mean you can use it promote your products or store or whatnot.

Sphere Engine--the premier A6 graphics plugin.