I found a picture of an object that I really like and would like to implement in my game by modelling something very similar… is that a copyright violation?
I did try to find the creator of the imagine, but no luck with that.
So can I model my own version of this or should I stay away from it since I cant get the creators permission?
Thanks for your feedback!
What is it? 
You’ll need a lawyer for that one.
As far as I know, modeling from photo creates derived work and therefore requires permission of original author.
See this: Rogers v. Koons - Wikipedia
That’s really unfortunate, because it pretty much means that if you want to model anything, you’d need to buy stock photos or hunt for public domain images. Otherwise there’s a lot of complications which involve “fair use”, and “originality”.
So you’d need to try to figure out license of that image. I think it is pretty hard to copyright a pyramid.
P.S. Oh, and apparently drawing or photographing a building for commercial purposes may require permission of the architect, depending on how old the building is. Copyright is fun, isn’t it?
Thanks for your feedback Neginfinity!
I wonder if all the people who make 3D models of cars, kitches, furniture and all that, get the permission from the manufacturer, or is it just common to made models of what you want and sell it?
After all… this people use even the brand name, logo and everything… its not just a “similar” car, its THE car they are modelling and selling.
No. Some of them don’t ask for permission and get away with it. Some of them don’t get away with it.
Modeling a car of a known brand or using their logos without permission is a big no, though.
Electronic arts had a lawsuit regarding unlicensed use of helicopters in their games. Basically, EA received cease and desist from helicopter manufacturer, and filed a lawsuit against helicopter manfucaturer, claiming first amendment. Not sure what happened with that.
At the same time, EA was known using college athletes likeness in their games without permissions (on photo stock sites submitting photos requires permission of the model).
In short, copyright law is a big mess. For example, fanart technically is violation of copyright, yet people produce it. Either way, if you want to play it safe, avoid recognizeable logos and such.
I do think that you’re unlikely to get into trouble if you use photo as inspiration to model your own illuminati-pyramid-on-the-rock, but if you want to play it by the book, you need to figure out what is the license of the photo.
And, once again, consult a lawyer if you’re in doubt.
They settled out of court.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/16/ea-settles-battlefield-3-and-textron-helicopter-lawsuit/
Using it for inspiration is fine. It’s a fairly generic rock. You can’t use the exact picture, but you can copy the structure.
But then that gets into being, what if it’s something discovered from 1000 BCE. Is it legal to copy it then? The copyright of it has passed by a couple millenniums lol.
Or the declaration of independence, is it something you have to have permission to use as well? (for USA).
Copyright expires 70 years after the death of the creator of the work. So you can copy anything from 1000 BCE. The declaration of independence is also public domain (from a copyright point of view). There are other ways you can still get in trouble using this material, but copyright violation is not one of them.
Note that if a photo was taken recently of an old artefact, the photo still falls under copyright for life of the photographer plus 70 years. You can copy the artefact, but not the photo.
@Kiwasi - Ah okay, yeah I knew it was 70/75 years somewhere between there.
But couldn’t I still copyright something I discovered? I know I know we aren’t lawyers lol.
Just think that’s interesting, if I found a new type of steel that nobody ever knew about, that for some reason
the ancients made and/or had from somewhere or something giving it to them, could I them patent and copyright it?
Being if this new type of steel could revolutionize everything lol. Yeah I know the likelyhood of that is slim to none lol.
But the Ancients really make you think. They have these blocks in this one place, that are literally perfectly cut, fit into place so well you can’t even stick a knife blade through them, the edges of the blocks will cut you like a knife and are as smooth as glass(some of them obviously - been thousands of years), how they were able to do this with no power tools and only rocks and chissles, baffles everybody, because according to Modern Archaeology - it’s just not possible with the tools they had bad in them days (With the tools we know they had).
I love History, you can learn so much, and perhaps - discover something that could revolutionize the world.
Like the Romans - they were technically the first to create Steam Engines, but they didn’t see a need because they already had free work.
Sorry didn’t mean to derail topic (if I did). I just get so hyped on learning History haha.
No. Copyright is for something you create. Its for expressions of art. It protects Mickey Mouse and Altiar. Specifically you cannot copyright facts or inventions. Its also worth noting that only the expression of art is protected by copyright.
Patents protect inventions and discoveries. Patents are very limited in scope, the protection only lasts 20 years. Again only specific inventions can be patented. And you can’t patent facts. (It is possible to patent the method to obtain said facts).
Check out these guys for a better summary. Or consult a lawyer.
Just copy it and find out who owns it based on who sues you first. Problem solved.
@Kiwasi - Good video!
That’s not necessarily true lol. Patent and Copyright Trolls are everywhere, they cost businesses billions of dollars a year just to say they own the rights when in fact they don’t. (I read something about this the other day, so I can’t quite remember the link as I just noticed it lol.).
there was an episode of “what would you do?”
theres like a coffee shop where they have paintings on the walls and theyre selling the paintings
a little girl would draw a doodle on the painting … thats what the “what would you do?” thing was
kid would say “i think its better now dont you think?” …
thing is… art is made to be derived from
everyone’s interpretation of art is different, and so any given art piece is ever changing
therefore, it is important that art is able to be changed.
preventing art to be altered is against art.
therefore copyrights are for idiots that dont understand art.
… they only understand money. … i guess?
therefore for those people to call themselves artists is … A JOKE!!
idk thats my view…
Also, IIRC laws don’t apply retroactively. Meaning law should not affect something that is older than that particular law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Works_created_before_1978
Basically, as i understand it, anything published prior to 1923 is in public domain according to US copyright law.
…
I gotta say, 19th century artists were lucky in the sense they didn’t have to care about all this nonsense. I mean, painting a picture of building technically may require architect’s permission these days.
Also, there are trademarks.
Well, the problem here is that the law doesn’t give a damn about the art.
You can blame disney for the current state of the copyright law. IIRC, originally copyright only lasted 30 years or so.
Agree with BoredMormon on this - the reference is a picture of a diamond shaped rock. 
I think Egyptians can claim original works on that - so the design you are referencing isn’t an original work.
Use the image for reference only and create something that is similar - don’t copy it, use it for reference.
Nobody has copyright protection on a diamond shaped rock. It would be ridiculous if they sued and they would loose if the did.
But I’m just an artist with an opinion -
Agreed with the “make your own pyramid-rock thing, but don’t copy the photo” mentality. The photo is protected, but the idea of the rock isn’t.
Just like how you can make a movie about space wizards with laser swords just fine, but you can’t call them “Jedi with lightsabers”, nor can you copy the physical appearance or likenesses of those protected properties.
Look for a public domain pyramid. Look for a public domain image of coal and use the first image to mask it to make a triangular coal image. Claim those two public domain works as the source for what you model from this, as it will be really hard to argue otherwise 
I agree that the handles look pretty unique, but image if they protected the blade lol! You wouldn’t be allowed to have solid colored fuzzy tube shapes.
@Tomnnn For this reason, I am closely following the Axanar lawsuit case. It’ll be interesting to see what the court says on this issue in regards to likeness, ideas, and similarities.
