[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


Toby White wrote:
> Casey said:
> >
> >Has anyone brought any copyright or plagiarism charges against him?
> >
> This is about as far from my area of law as dinosaurs are from my former
> area of biology.  However, I might be able to supply some parameters.
> [insert standard disclaimers about giving legal advice, "based on the facts
> you have given us", rules in jurisdiction other than those in which we are
> licensed, etc., etc. -- why does anyone even bother to pay lawyers for
> opinions, since we have to hedge them so much?]
> Supposing all of Brian Franczak's information is correct (and I don't know
> one way or the other), exactly what is Gurney misappropriating?  If I paint
> a picture of myself in the same pose and expression as the "Mona Lisa" or
> the "Odalisque," have I misappropriated anything?  Clearly not.  No one
> would confuse my stuff with DaVinci or Rodan (?) even if I had any artistic
> talent.  Besides, I don't look like the Mona Lisa or a harem girl: more like
> a short, stout, middle-aged male lawyer in fact.

Question: As far as I know, the Mona Lisa and the Odalisque aren't still
under copyright, are they?  If Gurney is copying from pieces done in the
last ten years, he's copying from, and making money from, copyrighted
works.  Wouldn't that make a difference in the legalities involved?

-- JSW