5 ms·

4. Get sued for copyright infringement.

by radicalbyte 11y ago

chrischen 11y ago
That would make a splash.
kefka 11y ago
Ok. Prove I used Exhibit A in making of this 3d scene.
- chralieboy 11y ago
  "Here is a subpoena showing the IP address of the AWS instance you controlled along with server logs showing you accessed that image. Based on public statements stating how you compiled the images and comparison between the client's photo and your image, it is not beyond reasonable doubt that infringement likely occurred."
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago
  Well we've got the server logs showing your AWS instance accessing that image on our server. As copyright is tort the usual burden of proof is balance of probabilities [UK, "preponderance of evidence" in USA I think; please correct if this is wrong in your jurisdiction], I'd say that's enough to swing it that you're going to need to prove you didn't use that image ... oh and we have a HN post replying to you suggesting you do this, which swings the balance a touch further. We can probably have an expert witness testify the scene could use that image (ie they don't visually disagree so much that the scene couldn't have derived from inter alia that image). Not enough perhaps to prove a criminal case ...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
3327 11y ago
thats part of business
- pc86 11y ago
  You should try getting into a more honest business, then.
matt_morgan 11y ago
It's a new work, with substantial creativity involved. I don't see it getting anywhere.
- teraflop 11y ago
  Having "substantial creativity involved" does not prevent something from being legally considered a derivative work.
  - davidmr 11y ago
    And furthermore, you cannot pay your lawyer in Amazon credits.
    - btown 11y ago
      Unless your lawyer's name is Ed Felten, your name is Barack Obama, and the Amazon credits can be applied to GovCloud!
- jhayward 11y ago
  "Substantial creativity" may get you past being a derivative work in Europe, but not in the US. Copyright law differs between jurisdictions. You'd have to be very careful. I like the original idea. What I'd do is make sure the resulting images don't have any significant reliance on any small set of originals. So if challenged, you could re-create the scene w/o the challenged images and show a court that the scene is not closely derived from any single source.
k_sze 11y ago
... 6. Profit.

4. Get sued for copyright infringement.

chrischen 11y ago

That would make a splash.

kefka 11y ago

Ok. Prove I used Exhibit A in making of this 3d scene.

chralieboy 11y ago
"Here is a subpoena showing the IP address of the AWS instance you controlled along with server logs showing you accessed that image. Based on public statements stating how you compiled the images and comparison between the client's photo and your image, it is not beyond reasonable doubt that infringement likely occurred."
pbhjpbhj 11y ago
Well we've got the server logs showing your AWS instance accessing that image on our server. As copyright is tort the usual burden of proof is balance of probabilities [UK, "preponderance of evidence" in USA I think; please correct if this is wrong in your jurisdiction], I'd say that's enough to swing it that you're going to need to prove you didn't use that image ... oh and we have a HN post replying to you suggesting you do this, which swings the balance a touch further. We can probably have an expert witness testify the scene could use that image (ie they don't visually disagree so much that the scene couldn't have derived from inter alia that image). Not enough perhaps to prove a criminal case ...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

3327 11y ago

thats part of business

pc86 11y ago
You should try getting into a more honest business, then.

matt_morgan 11y ago

It's a new work, with substantial creativity involved. I don't see it getting anywhere.

teraflop 11y ago
Having "substantial creativity involved" does not prevent something from being legally considered a derivative work.
- davidmr 11y ago
  And furthermore, you cannot pay your lawyer in Amazon credits.
  - btown 11y ago
    Unless your lawyer's name is Ed Felten, your name is Barack Obama, and the Amazon credits can be applied to GovCloud!
jhayward 11y ago
"Substantial creativity" may get you past being a derivative work in Europe, but not in the US. Copyright law differs between jurisdictions. You'd have to be very careful. I like the original idea. What I'd do is make sure the resulting images don't have any significant reliance on any small set of originals. So if challenged, you could re-create the scene w/o the challenged images and show a court that the scene is not closely derived from any single source.

k_sze 11y ago

... 6. Profit.