|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
does copying the color scheme is copyright abuse?
HI all i wonder if artist or photo owner (wardrobe stylist, photographer,ect) ask retoucher to copy color schemes,or want to make them photos look like reference does it can be a problem to the ones that create that look first? reference  before after   Apr 17 16 03:45 pm Link I'm not a law expert, it is certainly different in different places. But. if I wanted to do something like that, I would just say screw it, and do it. If someone made an issue of it, I would just claim ignorance, or coincidence. Of course, that is just me ! -Don Apr 17 16 04:19 pm Link this is red and white, you're welcome to use it  this is also red and white, you can't use it, it's a registered trademark  see the difference? orange and teal are okay, unless it's in the shape of a dolphin, then the NFL will visit and make you eat dinner from a straw for a month.  Apr 17 16 05:16 pm Link Thanks for response I assume that it's free to do as long as we coloring our image and not the same object, but as a single artist i am still worry bad thing happen. moreover due to hi-end brand campaign, Apr 17 16 06:22 pm Link I am in no way a lawyer, but in my opinion I believe that It's very difficult to claim to be the owner or creator of a color scheme used in fashion/beauty imagery. Even if an individual or company has become very well known worldwide for a specific color scheme in their imagery, how can you prove a color combo has never widely been used before you and claim exclusive use of that color scheme in images ? Where one would likely run into real trouble is for example using a very similar logo with similar color scheme to an established and trademarked brand or for example If you open a jewelry store and decide you are going to be using teal for all your packaging with white ribbons, once that jewelry store starts to become popular, then expect a call from the lawyers of Tiffany & Co. , teal or turquoise are not exactly the trademarked shade of Tiffany Blue, but their lawyers could easily argue that the Tiffany & Co. brand is being diluted or confused with the other jewelry brand. Apr 17 16 09:55 pm Link FKW wrote: Steven Burnette Retouch wrote: one small fact that people are overlooking. this use is not just only the color scheme. both images are of a model on a floating mattress in a pool with the same pose. there have been a few cases that pivoted on very closely matched concepts and looks. one simply had a red two decker bus in both images. court ruled that it was infringement last i heard. don't know if it was appealed. he would be correct to worry. Don Garrett wrote: your problem is that the concept, location, pose, color all are like the original image. just changing the viewpoint & perspective may not be enough. and now you admit the client ask copying it in a public forum. the ignorance/coincidence defense is now moot. Apr 17 16 11:53 pm Link No, that's just using an image for inspiration, the same way art has been used for years and years. Apr 18 16 02:42 am Link Leonard Gee Photography wrote: There also was the case of a model straddling a chair with her arms on the back of the chair. Apr 18 16 05:37 am Link Color itself or a combination of colors are not subject of copyright. Otherwise black and white conversion would be something proprietary which is not the case. Coca Cola did not invent the red color, so you can paint your car red. However using color combinations in particular context can result in legal conflicts. Example: making everything purple and putting a white text "Check our new beer" can attract Milka's attention. Apr 18 16 06:01 am Link Court sides with T-Mobile, bans AT&T's Aio Wireless from using magenta color http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/8/539323 … eless-over - The Tiffany Blue color is protected as a color trademark by Tiffany & Co. in some jurisdictions including the U.S. The color is produced as a private custom color by Pantone, with PMS number 1837, the number deriving from the year of Tiffany's foundation. As a trademarked color, it is not publicly available and is not printed in the Pantone Matching System swatch books. - Cadbury loses legal fight over use of color purple Last year Cadbury won a legal case to stop other chocolate firms using the colour - known as Pantone 2865c. But Swiss firm Nestle, the world's biggest food company, has now won an appeal against that earlier ruling. "Cadbury's formulation does not comply with the requirements for [trademark] registration," said the UK court. The Court of Appeal also said the trademark application lacked "the required clarity, precision, self-containment, durability and objectivity to qualify for registration". The legal battle has been running since 2008, when Nestle first opposed Cadbury's initial trademark application. Cadbury - bought by US food giant Kraft in 2010 - has been using a purple colour on its chocolate wrappers since the early 20th century. "We are disappointed by this latest decision but it's important to point out that it does not affect our long held right to protect our distinctive colour purple from others seeking to pass off their products as Cadbury chocolate," said a Cadbury spokesman. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-24401249 Apr 18 16 01:35 pm Link I can't see how copyright law would apply. Trademark law might apply, but the thing has to be actually trademarked and even then as long as you are not trying to confuse buyers about what brand they are buying even trademark law doesn't necessarily apply. And yes, I am not a lawyer. http://www.colormatters.com/color-and-m … gal-rights Apr 18 16 01:44 pm Link you can file copyright just about anything. you will also have to enforce it in court. if you loose you may have to pay the other party legal fee too Apr 18 16 09:05 pm Link thanks mate i hope all will be fine, copying color schemes from reference is good way to get mood so far,cz i dont have graphic design background to combine color so need to using visual reference when retouching so that i am not hit the wall Apr 19 16 12:17 am Link |
