Plagiarism vs. Satire...

[necro]

...in "fine art". Where is the line drawn?

Let's say I am working on a series of screenprints and in one or more I use character(s) from a comic book or a cartoon. Is it okay to do this as long as it's in some sort of satrical (i dont even know if thats a word) way? this may be a bad example, but like showing capt. america or some upstanding character shooting up smack or picking up a prostitute....

[Brendan Jordan]

...in "fine art". Where is the line drawn?

Let's say I am working on a series of screenprints and in one or more I use character(s) from a comic book or a cartoon. Is it okay to do this as long as it's in some sort of satrical (i dont even know if thats a word) way? this may be a bad example, but like showing capt. america or some upstanding character shooting up smack or picking up a prostitute....

I think if you draw Capt. America yourself, and don't just copy from an existing illustration . . . and if it is CLEARLY parody, then the ethical problems are solved . . . legally though, you'd have to ask a lawyer and they'd probably tell you that although parody is covered by the first amendment, using someone else's trademarked/copyrighted character is chancy at best. Better off creating a Capt. America-like character of your own. People have gotten away with using the real characters, but it's always opening yourself up to possible litigation.

I know Disney would sue, just for example.

[steve w]

Legally, I've heard that it's okay to do that sort of thing as long as it's
a single art piece, like a painting. But it get's sticky when you start doing multiples. I'm guessing you'd get a notice before legal action was taken.
I think Frank has some first-hand knowledge of this.

[raindog138]

[Brendan Jordan]

People have gotten away with using the real characters, but it's always opening yourself up to possible litigation.

[necro]

thank you!

appreciated.

[Sash]

...in "fine art". Where is the line drawn?

usually the line is drawn on paper. with a writing instrument.

sorry, couldn't resist.

it's satirical if the character used is in a different context or attitude than is customary.

so Superman drawn rocking out with the Melvins is satirical. but Superman fighting Lex Luthor King Jr. is not.

no one should mistake your parody for the original legitimate version, in other words.

[rotodesign]

I'm no lawyer, but here's my understanding: Parody protection covers editorial speech, which means in a book, article or fine art painting you're probably safe (though even then it depends on the amount of the original intellectual property used).

Parody protection does not cover items used for publicity or resale. Meaning for a poster you're probably not safe to use someone else's copyrighted imagery without permission, though, yes, people do it all the time. The copyright owner might not find out you used their intellectual property, or they may not mind, but if they do, they can sue, and you will lose.

[Shmogger]

There are so many variables involved it's enough to make your head spin. The bottom line is it always comes down to a pure judgment call about the overall degree of editorial speech versus appropriation. The more the work is weighted to speech, the more shielded it is from liability. The question is who makes the call: the people involved, or a judge after a long expensive legal process? Pretty much the same judgment call either way in the end.

Copyright and trademark go hand in hand when it comes to images and visual arts. Parody is a defense to both but fair use is a similar argument that can get you to the same result.

Keep in mind that the amount of sales generated (or at least intended) by using someone else's intellectual property is usually the biggest consideration when that someone is deciding whether or not to sue.