Copyright Question

[SpottyFrog]

Hi, I am designing a card game and I need some images to go on the cards. Rather than pay someone to do the graphics I thought, while we are in lockdown I would have a go at using Designer myself. I am not particularly artistic and I have not used the software before, so I thought the easiest way would be to find some existing images and use the pen tool to trace the existing designs. I am fairly pleased with the results, but I am worried that if I published the game I would be breaking the copyright on the image. Would I need to make substantial changes to the picture to get round this? I have attached an example of my version of a farmer image I am thinking of using together with the original.

[GarryP]

Welcome to the forums.
A tricky question.
Your best bet, if you were to ‘trace’ someone else’s artwork, would probably be to ask a copyright lawyer in your country.
Different countries have different copyright laws.
Can’t you find some copyright-free images or some images you can licence cheaply? There must be loads out there.

[wonderings]

I would think if you altered it and made it your own you might be ok. This looks like you directly ripped off the artists original work which he/she did to make money and earn a living. It is a tricky subject as Garry said. This link might help, or might not.

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-art-copyright-explained

Not sure if forgery would be considered here as you are copying someones work who makes a living from their work. Personally I think that is stealing.

[PixelPest]

I´d be pissed if I´m the author.

[SpottyFrog]

Thanks for your replies. Most of the supposedly copyright-free images are only free for personal use. I don't want to waste my money purchasing licences for lots of images if the game is not worth marketing. I am thinking of making a few copies of it using the images I have created, which I will give away for free, so I can get it play tested. I don't want to get into any copyright trouble, so if it is worthwhile I can always pay someone to design more unique images or purchase proper licences at that stage. How does that sound?

[Move Along People]

-

[wonderings]

1 minute ago, SpottyFrog said:

Thanks for your replies. Most of the supposedly copyright-free images are only free for personal use. I don't want to waste my money purchasing licences for lots of images if the game is not worth marketing. I am thinking of making a few copies of it using the images I have created, which I will give away for free, so I can get it play tested. I don't want to get into any copyright trouble, so if it is worthwhile I can always pay someone to design more unique images or purchase proper licences at that stage. How does that sound?

Yes, because people want to get paid for their work. Because you don't want to waste your money is not a good reason to copy and use someone else work. You giving it away for free does not make it ok or any better and probably makes it worse as there will be a near identical free version floating around when someone made it and is trying to make money off the original. This is theft. If you were tracing for yourself and playing around no issue, but this is for a project you are working on. I am guessing it costs less then $20 USD for image, not something that will break the bank. 

[SpottyFrog]

Okay thanks for your advice. I will not use the image and seek an alternative solution.

[GarryP]

If you think the game will sell more than a few copies then you you might want to save a lot of time by buying a licence for some ready-made artwork.
For example, Graphic Mama https://graphicmama.com/ (I have no affiliation) have some really lovely stuff that’s sold in bundles for around $32 (or less) with a use-as-many-times-as-you-want licence. And you will know you won't get sued (unless you break the licencing agreement, of course.)

[SpottyFrog]

Thanks for the link. I will check it out. I have already spent hours on Designer creating images for the game. This one was made by copying a photo of a real hutch, converting it into a vector image and adding some rabbits I had previously made. I made 5 other hutches in this way. Do you think that I can get away with using these images or do I need to start from scratch?

[GarryP]

If, in this case, you are tracing a photo of a hutch to make a vector object then, unless someone can identify the original photo of the hutch and claim copyright for it, and claim that your vector version is obviously the same thing (tricky to do), then you’re probably okay. Not definitely, but probably.
As for the rabbits, the same thing applies: Tracing from a photo can be seen as the creation of a new artwork. Might be slippery ground but might not. A good lawyer will be able to tell you for certain.
You can either guess, or take advice that might not be correct, for free, or you can pay to get the answer and be sure.

[SpottyFrog]

Thanks for your advice Garry. It was very helpful.

[GarryP]

You're welcome.

[IanSG]

You could ask the copyright holder for permission or a price.  Some people will see it purely as a financial transaction, others are just happy that you like their work

[wonderings]

I would say if you are in the proof stage of your product, I would use the watermarked vector image and leave the watermarks on. There is no issue here as you are still in the design phase, not selling it, not distributing it. I do this all the time when putting together a project. If I am using stock photos that I will need to purchase I use the low res watermarked versions till approval at which point I purchase the images I need and finish the job.  

[SpottyFrog]

Thanks for your ideas. One of the problems I have is that the game would look much more professional if all the images on the cards look like they have been drawn by the same artist. I can  probably find a set of rabbit images by the same designer but I also need designs for the hutches, foxes, a badgers, farmers and a robbers. The only way I can probably acheive that is to pay someone to design them for me or make them all myself. As they are vertors, I could probably make enough chages to the shape images to make them look totally unrecognisable from the originals!

[Cecil]

I always wondered if, after all the recording years behind us, is there truly a new tune, song or lyrics, without some copyright infringement known or unknown to music artist.  That little tune that hums in your ear.  I guess the key word is known and each individuals means to lawyer up.  Interesting to read different regions laws concerning security cameras.  Legal in one area, not so in another or same applies to recording telephone conversations. I wonder if the Crop Tool was ever issued a patent?  I’m not suggesting the free and quality advice provided in this thread should be ignored.

[Ron P.]

8 hours ago, Cecil said:

I always wondered if, after all the recording years behind us, is there truly a new tune, song or lyrics, without some copyright infringement known or unknown to music artist.  That little tune that hums in your ear.  I guess the key word is known and each individuals means to lawyer up.  Interesting to read different regions laws concerning security cameras.  Legal in one area, not so in another or same applies to recording telephone conversations. I wonder if the Crop Tool was ever issued a patent?  I’m not suggesting the free and quality advice provided in this thread should be ignored.

Led Zeppelin has been sued more times for copyright infringement because of this. They did finally win on their notorious Highway to Heaven. If someone wanted to lawyer up, the old classic rock-n-roll songs all used a 3-chord progressions, and most the same 3 chords. ZZ-Top is said to have made millions off of the same song, just different lyrics.

[IanSG]

1 hour ago, Ron P. said:

notorious Highway to Heaven.

The little known AC/DC collaboration 😀.  

[R C-R]

2 hours ago, IanSG said:

The little known AC/DC collaboration 😀.  

Or the even less well known Stairway to Hell?