Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
Censoring an old strip?
Sidhekin:
Legally? Nope; the copyright is long expired.
I'd watch out for fan(atic)s, though.
ETA: They actually did paint over The Last Supper, the latest such incident from 1978 to 1999. Not all were too happy about that: James Beck was "scathing", and Michael Daley described a sleeve as "a serious misrepresentation of Leonardo's final design". What might they make of a mariachi band?
Method of Madness:
How would the copyright stop me from altering a copy I own? It could stop me from displaying the new version, sure, but it can't stop me from actually altering it for my personal use. That's like saying I can't buy a book and cross out the main character's name and write my own. (I have never done this, but reserve the right to do so.)
Sidhekin:
I probably shouldn't call it "copyright". It's just that "opphavsrett", the rights of the originator, is a bundled lot of rights, and usually translated as "copyright". Having said that, I think an argument can be made from "copyright" alone:
You can amend the work, but you can never show anyone. Not until copyright has expired.
So, what happens if the work is misplaced or stolen? How will the artist's copyright be protected?
And then, what happens if you go bankrupt? If it is a printing of a book, that's no problem: Burn it. (Ouch.) No damage to copyright, and no great loss to your creditors. (It'll probably be worthless, anyway.)
If it is an original painting or sculpture, though? You're in a fix: If you give it up to your creditors, you have violated copyright; if you do not, you have wronged your creditors.
So, don't do it. :)
PHDrillSergeant:
There certainly are a lot of people offended by a years-old hand-drawn webcomic on the internet. Claiming stuff is "horrendously offensive" and such. While I understand that rape is a serious subject, I also think that just because someone makes a joke about it doesn't mean everyone should suddenly go into "censor it" mode. I wholeheartedly oppose censorship of any kind, and I've said before that I lose respect for people who censor their work because someone else is offended. If you don't like it, don't read it.
--- Quote from: Sidhekin on 29 Apr 2013, 23:38 ---You can amend the work, but you can never show anyone. Not until copyright has expired.
--- End quote ---
That's not how copyright works. At all.
You could show people all you wanted to. You could plaster your face with the image and distribute it and all sorts of stuff. It would be a copyright violation, but you could do it.
It only becomes illegal after the copyright owner tells you you cannot do whatever it is you're doing anymore. But you have to actually do it first. But in the case of an altered webcomic, or a book with names changed, the copyright owner isn't going to say anything because he'd be pretty much unable to prove damages.
A lot of people make this mistake, and it leads to scathing criticisms of copyright; the illegality of what you're doing is something which is a right held by the copyright owner. If the copyright owner doesn't stop you, you're good as gold.
Method of Madness:
Is art not covered under the first sale doctrine?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version