|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Jul 30, 2010 23:08:19 GMT 1
Very sorry! I shall remove it immediately, no copyright infringement was intended. I have never seen this picture reproduced on the internet and I was sure many of The War of the Worlds fans here had never seen it at all. I hold the greatest respect for Peter's work and have done for many years.
|
|
|
Post by poyks on Jul 30, 2010 23:51:51 GMT 1
Little point for discussion, wouldn't Michael Trim have more rights over such a picture as they are based on his designs?
Also it's a poster that Mr. Fussey bought from a shop, so he's already paid the royalties on it.
I think it's fantastic that people are still passionate about the picture and I know that no copyright infringements were intended at all.
|
|
|
Post by Relyt on Jul 31, 2010 3:46:57 GMT 1
Hold on here. I have seen the picture elsewhere on the internet. I am sure that this is not infringing upon anything because it is under fair use. Lonesome Crow paid for the poster as Poyks says and no one on this forum is profiting from this image. Frankly, I do not see any reason for it to have to be taken down.
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Jul 31, 2010 23:28:54 GMT 1
Hold on here. I have seen the picture elsewhere on the internet. I am sure that this is not infringing upon anything because it is under fair use. Lonesome Crow paid for the poster as Poyks says and no one on this forum is profiting from this image. Frankly, I do not see any reason for it to have to be taken down. I don't know relyt. if I painted a picture and posted it on the internet for sale and then someone bought one copy, it would not give them the right to reproduce my work and start handing copies out free of charge. No one would bother buying the painting off me when they could get a free copy off this other person. Even if the painting is not for sale at this moment in time, it might be on sale in the future and my posting it could harm the owners sales.
|
|
Ashe Raven
Been Here a while!
Peace on Earth? Bwhahahahahahah!
Posts: 109
|
Post by Ashe Raven on Jul 31, 2010 23:48:38 GMT 1
This is a fair point. As a pro-artist who suffered this myself one always has to be aware, but a polite reminder rather than the abrupt demand would have been much better
|
|
|
Post by Relyt on Aug 1, 2010 1:37:32 GMT 1
Hold on here. I have seen the picture elsewhere on the internet. I am sure that this is not infringing upon anything because it is under fair use. Lonesome Crow paid for the poster as Poyks says and no one on this forum is profiting from this image. Frankly, I do not see any reason for it to have to be taken down. I don't know relyt. if I painted a picture and posted it on the internet for sale and then someone bought one copy, it would not give them the right to reproduce my work and start handing copies out free of charge. No one would bother buying the painting off me when they could get a free copy off this other person. Even if the painting is not for sale at this moment in time, it might be on sale in the future and my posting it could harm the owners sales. I was thinking that since the original painting has long since been out of print posting the original image or a variation of it would be alright because no sales are being made. And your image is just fan art, right? It makes as much sense as a person who traces a copyrighted image and shows the tracing to his or her friends, and then gets forced to burn the image because of "infringement." That just would not be right, because it's being used fairly. There are thousands upon thousands of fan artists on the internet, and the vast majority of them still have their work up, even though some are variations of copyrighted images. I'm not trying to prove you wrong. I'm trying to help because I feel it's unfair for you to be forced to take down your image.
|
|
|
Post by poyks on Aug 1, 2010 14:29:22 GMT 1
Fair points all round, but I agree with Ashe, it could have been addressed more politely. Shame though, the picture may just fade away into obscurity now.
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Aug 1, 2010 21:29:31 GMT 1
It makes as much sense as a person who traces a copyrighted image and shows the tracing to his or her friends, and then gets forced to burn the image because of "infringement." That just would not be right, because it's being used fairly. There are thousands upon thousands of fan artists on the internet, and the vast majority of them still have their work up, even though some are variations of copyrighted images. No it doesn't work like that. It would be like someone taking a Stephen King book and a typewriter and making a duplicate of the original novel, the work may be new, the ink still wet, but it's still a copy of someone else's work. We have had the painting on the site for several months, I'm sure everyone who enjoys good art has already...... appreciated it to their hard drive by now. ;D
|
|
|
Post by richardburton on Aug 16, 2010 9:05:58 GMT 1
I have pm'd elsonsister to ask permission to use the image on the SciFiShocks website. We'll wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by mrgrotey on Aug 16, 2010 10:45:37 GMT 1
I own the copyright to the image google uses as their logo.
See, I can make statements too. Who's to say elsonsister does actually own it anyway? Yeah ok they may do but at the same time they could just be a complete random talking nonsense.
At least show some proof after making such claims.
|
|
|
Post by richardburton on Aug 16, 2010 12:21:23 GMT 1
That's a fair point, MrG. I haven't had a response back yet.
|
|
|
Post by mrgrotey on Aug 16, 2010 16:25:53 GMT 1
The only reason I say that is worst case scenario they could request money for the usage of the image being a complete nobody just on a scam mission.
Im not saying any of us would or wouldnt pay for that right but there are very gullable people out there that fall for this stuff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2010 17:46:42 GMT 1
I was wondering myself... why would the artist's sister have legal possession over the painting instead of the original artist?
|
|
|
Post by Lonesome Crow on Aug 16, 2010 19:09:28 GMT 1
I was wondering myself... why would the artist's sister have legal possession over the painting instead of the original artist? There is a very good reason, From Wikipedia: Peter Elson (1947–1998) was an English science fiction illustrator whose work appeared on the covers of numerous science fiction paperback novels, as well as in the Terran Trade Authority series of illustrated books. Elson, whose illustrations often placed detailed, brightly-liveried spacecraft against vividly colored backgrounds, influenced an entire generation of science fiction illustrators and concept artists. Alas he is no more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2010 20:21:14 GMT 1
Oh. That's too bad.
|
|