Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Copyright of a Mural  (Read 2691 times)
valis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« on: June 03, 2004, 03:05:20 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Since the paint is part of the building itself, and not a simple piece of art hanging on a wall, it almost certainly belongs to the owner of the building. You can't remove the mural without removing the entire wall -- so just like any building fixture (such as a ceiling fan), the owner of the building owns everything fixed onto the building.[/font]
Logged
howard smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1237


« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2004, 04:41:52 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Tony, agreed.  I can buy a picture of a Frakn Llyod Wright hosue, have it drawn upo and built.  Still, I stole the house plan.

A copy right of a photo is implied when it is taken.  Do I need to process the film or image to getthe copy right?  I don't know.

If I put Venus' arms back on, can I copy right the statue?  I doubt it.[/font]
Logged
Tony Collins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2004, 04:56:41 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Spoke to the Lawyer who naturally believes that he can issue a licence for me to use my photo. He guessed at a fee but said that he would consider less when I explained that his figure would make the whole enterpprise uneconomic, next stage to get an idea of potential sales.
Tony[/font]
Logged
Edward
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 134


« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2004, 03:43:20 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']Is the wall in plain view or do you need to be in the house?  In the US, you can take pictures of buildings without the owner's permission, you just cannot build them.[/font]
Logged
Tony Collins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2004, 08:03:30 AM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']I took a photo some years ago of a mural which is now in a fairly derelict and mutilated state. The artist, Robert Lenkiewicz is dead. Who owns the copyright? The owner of the building? the artist's estate? One could argue that the painting no longer "exists" in it original form due to damage. Can copyright exist for a non existant object? I'm curious as I am thinking of self publishing a postcard. If copyright exists the same in principle applies to graffiti on a wall. I will be giving the artist's lawyer a ring, It will be interesting to find out his view. (I can guess  :laugh: )
Tony[/font]
Logged
Tony Collins
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 68


« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2004, 04:13:48 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']True, the picture cannot be removed, but the art came from the artist's head and it might be argued that intellectual rights belong to him. If you own a house, I believe that you can't build a copy as it would violate the architect's ownership of the design.[/font]
Logged
framah
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1182



« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2004, 06:03:23 PM »
ReplyReply

[font color=\'#000000\']You might look at it this way... if the photo you took was of the mural on the wall, plainly showing the wall,  your image might be considered an original image as it is your interpretation of the mural on the wall. What you have done is significantly changed the original intent of the creator of the mural. I've read of a few instances such as this where an artist used an image made by someone else and altered it enough so as to make it his own, orginal interpretation and  the courts upheld his right to what he did and no infringment was found. Andy Warhols Campbell's Soup can image comes to mind, tho I'm not sure how he changed it enough to call it an original. Looks just like the can to me.   :p[/font]
Logged

"It took a  lifetime of suffering and personal sacrifice to develop my keen aesthetic sense."
Raoul
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2004, 07:32:53 AM »
ReplyReply

If you wish to publish your picture, talking to a lawyer is a good idea. In France a photo magazine (I believe it was Chasseur d'Images?) recently got fined because it printed a photo of the Louvre Pyramid. Apparently the rights of these pictures belong to Ieoh Ming Pei, it's architect. While pictures of things older than 50 years are free of copyright, the new addition to the Louvre is not. Mr Pei filed suit.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2007, 04:40:11 AM by Raoul » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad