Is using a google image as a background pic for concept art copyright infringement?

K

Khadijah

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
Messages
16,368
Location
Hell
OK Ill try and make this as quick as possible. I got hired by my uncle to design a idea he has that he wants to get a patent on, involving rims for cars. My aunt (his sister) said she would back it financially and pay me for each design with a total of 7 designs.

Anyways, what I am designing is a prototype image or concept art. It is made to show to the patent attorney and wont be seen by no one else.So i designed the rims and then after rendering them i placed them on the wheels of actual cars. I used 2 cars to put the rims on, a ferrari and a old classic pontiac . My uncle wanted the rims to be on hot looking cars so they would present well to the patent officer/attorney/whatever.

Well I got these images off of Google. The ferrari one was a free desktop wallpaper i downloaded. The pontiac was a photo that came up and it was on a open car forum where people post pictures of their cars. Anyways, now my aunt thinks that we are doin copyright infringement. 8o LOL. Becuz we didnt get express permission from the "owner" of the images .

My uncle tried to explain to her that no one is gonna see these images except the patent attorney, and that we aint using the images of the CARS to profit. they are simply a vehicle that is a background image to present our idea on. it could be any car, it really dont matter. But i already did all the work to make these look professional and nice and it wouldnt be that easy to just go back and do it all over again. Plus, what is my other option, to go take photos of peoples cars in parking lots?

Now if we were puttin the rims on the photos of the cars, and printin those out as posters, etc, that would be possible copyright infringement. But im 99% sure that what we are doing is in the clear especialy since we will no be profiting off the IMAGES at all. They are just designs for rims that we are gettin manufactured, the actual rims is what we would be selling. the artwork is just to present the idea.

These pics werent stock photos that need royalties, and there was no copyright info on any of the pages i got the cars from, PLUS the ferrari was a free wallpaper so how could that possibly be a issue. They are from google. AFAIK that is pretty much open ground and unless theres copyright info explicity stated youre cool? Is that considered public domain or what.

Well all this explanation aint working, and now my aunt pulled all the money and said she wont do it, and wont pay me, after i already did all the designs. I realy need some help from you guys that would give me some cold hard legal evidence that this is safe and we aint gonna have to worry about somehow, from showing a patent attorney in a private meeting, that some guy in minnesota is gonna somehow find out about using a pic of his car in our concept art and sue the shit outta us. This is pissin me off alot and i would appreciate any help i can get cuz without some laws and whatnot to refer to this bitch is gonna be extremely stubborn and paranoid. IM sorry this is so long i just wanted to include as much info as possible. TIA ....
 
In a world that many lawyers wish we lived in, big brother would have video footage of you picking out those photos, and big brother would know that those photos were used as an element of the product you are showing to your attorney. In this "perfect" world, some might argue that you owe the owner of the photo a fee for using his photo as a pedestal for your presentation.

But in reality, you have absolutely nothing to be concerned with. In fact, I would go so far as to use the images in an advertisement even though it may technically be infringement. Cross that bridge when you come to it. If an issue does arise, you must be doing something right in order to garner enough attention to attract flies.
 
He aint got one yet. When he has it all done its gonna get presented to the patent guy but right now it aint like he got a specific one that hes workin with yet. Anyways , i dont really care about that part of it. DM, we already KNOW that this aint copyright infringement. That aint the real question, i just summed it up in the title to give people a better idea of the topic and what its about. So we aint gotta ask the (future) patent attorney if it is or not. the goal here is to make someone ELSE understand that this aint infringement, and WHY it aint. what im lookin for is some legal information i can present to my aunt to backup my point, cuz she will never listen to me.

Im just in charge of the concept art, which i got done, and should be gettin paid for, and my bitch aunt who thinks she knows everything refuses to pay becuz she thinks that we can get sued for the images, which no one will ever see and will never get released to the public, there fore she wont pay for them. i guess she said she wont support it since then she can be held liable too or somethin 8( 8o Yes i know a paranoid freak. in this world you gotta be paranoid wit all the stupid lawsuits yea, but this is pretty clear that it aint illegal and is safe from lawsuits.

But my point here is, that what I am really lookin for is some laws and statutes n whatnot that I can reference and send to her in a letter to show her just how legal and acceptable this is. There aint no other way to get her to listen, Thats why i posted this in Legal instead of SO , that way i can get some factual legal fancy pants talk to make her understand, and get paid what im owed. If i just show her somethin that says "Statute 5290, sect a, paragraph c2 (14)" She wont even read it shell just say OK, she dont know what she is talking about so i just need a way to say this in non-laymans terms so she will think its all serious and realize shes bein retarded. We already told her what i said here in the beginning, and she still refuses to listen so i need cold hard evidence.
 
Lacey, your understanding of copyright law is incorrect, I'm afraid.

Under US law, everything is automatically covered by copyright.

In terms of your specific situation: if I put an image on my website, I'm saying it's OK for you to look at. I'm not saying that it's OK for you to download it and re-use it in any way. Unless I actually, directly state that you can download it, you have to assume that you can't.

Also, US law doesn't specifically require the display of copyright info (it used to, but that rule was changed in the 1970s or so). I don't have to say "images copyright Infinite Jest" - they are automatically copyright.

So these images are definitely covered by copyright. Now, are you infringing? That's actually a difficult question, and one that could only really be decided by a judge - it would vary from case to case based on the circumstances. There's a principle called fair use, which allows you to use someone's copyright material, in certain situations. Also, it's quite likely that there's no problem with using the wallpaper image, because they provide it for the purposes of downloading and display on your own machine.

In summary:

1. Yes, those images were copyright
2. You may or may not have had a fair use right to use them
3. You're right, you will never get caught, so #2 is probably irrelevant.
4. If you did get caught, the copyright owner could sue you - but probably not for much.
5. We don't know whether the copyright owners would care one way or the other (I'm inclined to think that they wouldn't).

For future reference, I suggest you look for Creative Commons licensed images. Creative Commons is a way in which copyright owners give other people the rights to use their images - usually, they will say "you can reuse this however you like, as long as you don't make money off it" (or sometimes, even making money can be fine).

Try searching Flickr for photos tagged with Creative Commons and with Ferrari (e.g.). For example - lots of images there, all freely available for you to use however you want
 
AFAIK you dont have to pay royalties on stock photo images.. the way stock photography works is you pay a one time fee for usage of the image (or library of images like graphic design places often use).... and once you've paid that single fee its yours to use.

thats why its called stock photography. of course this could differ depending on the agreement with the stock photography company..... my uncle has a shitload of photos i was thinking of starting a stock photo company from
 
lacey k said:
OK Ill try and make this as quick as possible. I got hired by my uncle to design a idea he has that he wants to get a patent on, involving rims for cars. My aunt (his sister) said she would back it financially and pay me for each design with a total of 7 designs.
Click to expand...

Yikes, this is a legal can of worms. First off, just because it's on google or wherever doesn't mean the owner doesn't retain the rights. (And I do make images for a living, and I do very much own them, and I have gone after people who infringed on my copyright. "Owner" does not go in quotes.)

But, long story short, you're cool if you're only showing the images to the patent attorney. In the future, though, make sure you have permission to use any images in your designs. People *will* sue you.
 
Infinite Jest said:
Lacey, your understanding of copyright law is incorrect, I'm afraid.

Under US law, everything is automatically covered by copyright.

In terms of your specific situation: if I put an image on my website, I'm saying it's OK for you to look at. I'm not saying that it's OK for you to download it and re-use it in any way. Unless I actually, directly state that you can download it, you have to assume that you can't.

Also, US law doesn't specifically require the display of copyright info (it used to, but that rule was changed in the 1970s or so). I don't have to say "images copyright Infinite Jest" - they are automatically copyright.

So these images are definitely covered by copyright. Now, are you infringing? That's actually a difficult question, and one that could only really be decided by a judge - it would vary from case to case based on the circumstances. There's a principle called fair use, which allows you to use someone's copyright material, in certain situations. Also, it's quite likely that there's no problem with using the wallpaper image, because they provide it for the purposes of downloading and display on your own machine.

In summary:

1. Yes, those images were copyright
2. You may or may not have had a fair use right to use them
3. You're right, you will never get caught, so #2 is probably irrelevant.
4. If you did get caught, the copyright owner could sue you - but probably not for much.
5. We don't know whether the copyright owners would care one way or the other (I'm inclined to think that they wouldn't).
Click to expand...

The wallpapers are just for downloading and using on your machine - you don't have permission to use them for other purposes.

Fair Use doesn't apply in this case. You won't get caught, but if the photographer found out you used his images he would want, and be entitled to compensation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top