Cake Central › Cake Forums › Cake Talk › Cake Decorating › Edible images
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Edible images - Page 4

post #46 of 50

Now, there are certain circumstances in which there is a compulsory license provision in the law. The major example in U.S. copyright law has to do with non-dramatic musical compositions: so long as at least one sound recording of such a work has been released to the public, either by, or with the blessing of, the owner, anybody willing to pay a statutory royalty (which is, I understand, considerably more than the negotiated royalty for an authorized recording usually is) can release his or her own recording of the work, so long as there are no substantive changes to it, and the owner of the work can't legally do anything to stop it.

 

But at least at present, there's no such provision for literary or visual works, at least in the U.S.

James H. H. Lampert
Professional Dilettante

Web site: http://www.hbquik.com/jamesl

Flickr "baked goods" set http://flic.kr/s/aHsjvZvdTh

Reply

James H. H. Lampert
Professional Dilettante

Web site: http://www.hbquik.com/jamesl

Flickr "baked goods" set http://flic.kr/s/aHsjvZvdTh

Reply
post #47 of 50
Interesting information about the compulsory license. It seems like it only covers the musical composition of a work and not the sound recording itself though, so you would be able to record your own performance of someone else's composition via a compulsory license but you would still need to negotiate with the IP owner if you wanted to copy their recording of said composition.

Literary and visual works do not lend themselves to this distinction so the license would need to cover the entire work. It would be an interesting experiment though, I wonder how many people would pay a $10-20 license fee for each copyrighted character on a cake they sell. At the current levels of enforcement, probably not too many.

More info:
http://rightsflow.com/resources/copyright-licensing-resources/compulsory-license/
post #48 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Annabakescakes View Post

No one is likely to sell images of it or put it on their wall as art. It is just a picture of a cake.

People post images of infringing cakes publicly all the time, just search for the name of a copyrighted character plus "cake" in Google Images (or even here on CC) for many examples.
No! Really??? I mean they are free to look at, no one is charging admission to veiw the photos, rather than paying to go to Disney Land, is what I mean. Or selling the pictures of cakes as wall art, rather than people going to the Disney store for a Mickey Mouse poster. It is one time use, and gone, rather than a lamp, or bedding.
Beginners, be sure to parrot advice and get your post count up as fast as you can. After all, it's not what you know, it's what people THINK you know.
Reply
Beginners, be sure to parrot advice and get your post count up as fast as you can. After all, it's not what you know, it's what people THINK you know.
Reply
post #49 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annabakescakes View Post

No! Really??? I mean they are free to look at, no one is charging admission to veiw the photos, rather than paying to go to Disney Land, is what I mean. Or selling the pictures of cakes as wall art, rather than people going to the Disney store for a Mickey Mouse poster. It is one time use, and gone, rather than a lamp, or bedding.

Whether or not an infringing copy is a single-use item is irrelevant under copyright law, the point is that someone is buying a fondant/gumpaste/etc. copy of Mickey someone made instead of having to go to the Disney Store to buy a licensed item.

In fact, if the infringing item is single-use one could argue the infringement does even greater financial harm to the IP owner in aggregate, since the IP owner could have sold more licensed copies of a single-use item than a reusable item.
post #50 of 50

With regard to single-use items, I'm reminded of stories I've heard about textbook publishers punishing schools for having students write answers on their own paper instead of in consumable-by-design workbooks.

 

To a large extent, Disney is as concerned with protecting the integrity of their characters as with revenue. If you, for example, commission a custom "original art" watch at the clock shop in Disneyland, you have a limited selection of pre-approved layouts for any given artist, who can only go so far in customizing it without having to go through a lengthy approval process as if it were a completely new layout. Or, some years ago, when the Walt Disney World Railroad developed their "Steam Trains Tour," and WDWRR people themselves came up with pin and badge designs to go with it, the Art Department left the designs mostly as is, except for a few adjustments to make sure Mickey's face was within specs.

 

Same basic concept as how, with the DecoPac licensed character kits, you are expected to follow the specified layout, deviating from it only to the bare minimum extent needed to fit it to the size and shape of the cake.

 

And don't let anybody connected with The Walt Disney Company catch you circulating "toon porn" with any of their characters!icon_eek.gif

James H. H. Lampert
Professional Dilettante

Web site: http://www.hbquik.com/jamesl

Flickr "baked goods" set http://flic.kr/s/aHsjvZvdTh

Reply

James H. H. Lampert
Professional Dilettante

Web site: http://www.hbquik.com/jamesl

Flickr "baked goods" set http://flic.kr/s/aHsjvZvdTh

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cake Decorating
Cake Central › Cake Forums › Cake Talk › Cake Decorating › Edible images