Copyright of doll vs Copyright of photos of dolls?

Yes I know there are many copiers (projectors etc)...To me that is unethical unless you state that your art work was composed that way and you dont try to hide it. As far as digital art, I think it is fascinating and beautiful and complicated!!! I am not familiar with that field and have to many irons in the fire to try and tackle it....but I do so admire it! Your point is well taken and appreciated...thanks to you.

 

Even though it is recognizable as a Dollstown doll, IMHO as the wife of a professional artist, you would NOT need to ask for permission as long as there was no copying, tracing, etc involved. At that point the doll becomes a piece of a still life. You don't need permission to paint a picture of a Wedgewood Vase. You should not need permission to paint a picture of a BJD, nor to profit from the sale of that picture. There is such an enormous amount of precedent that I very much doubt you would have any trouble.

 

Thank you for the advice.

 

I have struggled with this for about a decade. That's how long I've been a free lance artist. I've read big thick books, and asked an attorney. The one safe way would be if the company, and that would have to be the right signatures on the correctly worded agreement, gave written permission.

The percentage ruling is often taught in art schools and the book I thought might be the right one said that is all wrong. In their words, if you PIRATED an image, does not matter how much you change it. That was very discouraging to me at the time.

The attorney said my exposure was so small, not to worry. But I'd like my exposure to be a little bigger. ^_^

Then I think about it if it were MY art being photographed and used. I don't feel all that exited about seeing one of my photographs being used as an avatar. That occurred to me in dA and I happened to catch it. In that case I would have been flattered if they had asked. But they passed it off as their own. THAT I think is clearly always wrong.

After those 2 "for sures" -- it gets increasingly muddy and discouraging when I think about wanting to paint watercolor-on-paper images of dolls. Which is exactly what I would LOVE to do. I can do portraits for individual people. But the materials and time it takes to do those is hard to make a living doing. 24 hours a day just isn't enough. As a single woman, I can't afford to give away that much time out of what needs to be a "work week". I would go out and get a regular job, but I'm disabled. Until I can find other windows open where God closed certain doors to me, I keep looking for a way to respect these laws and still use the talents I have.

Vincent Van Gogh re-worked images of his favorite artist. Of course, he only sold about one painting, and that to his brother. Maybe another to his doctor? I'd have to google for exact details, but you get the point. In general anyway?

When people say, GO AHEAD, it is usually prefaced with "I very much doubt" you will get into trouble. And that is probably the best answer we can get. Until a particular instance is taken to court, there might be question about how the ruling would fall. We could probably site real examples from trials that would have conflicting results. Maybe?

A few things about this is clear. The rest, not so much. And there is that issue of different countries taking different views. The ethical, higher ruling? Probably also on an individual basis [beyond those obvious examples].

If I'm wrong, I would LOVE to know what is definitely correct. But I'd have to be given the source of an authoritative answer before I would be sure.

 

Our litigious society - helps my brothers (lawyers) make a living LOL BJD companies would lose LOTS of money if those who bought them were strictly prevented from painting/photographing their dolls (because they'd lose a lot of customers). I mean, really. The amount of work to create a good photo story, or an oil painting which is essentially a still life, is immense. Identifying the doll is about all I would feel morally obligated to do.
But this thread & others like it do make me worry about the stifling of creativity in the world. Shakespeare living today would never have been allowed to put on his plays (derivative, ya know?). Think about that for just a bit, please.