Is This A Copyright Issue
Faeryl Womyn
Posts: 3,628
Nor sure how it works with architecture, but this bridge recently released in the Daz store, and it does look very good, is a replica of the Hungarian Liberty Bridge in Budapest. There is no reference to the source used to create the bridge and it doesn't carry an editorial license. Is it safe to use this commercially.
The prop in question is this one ...
https://www.daz3d.com/fn-bridge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Bridge_(Budapest)
image_2023-10-17_215526885.png
938 x 517 - 693K
Post edited by Faeryl Womyn on
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
It should be well out of copyright, given that it was built at the end of the nineteenth century and the designer died in 1927
Oh right I had forgotten about the time aspect, thanks Richard.
...love the little tram that comes with it, as it eminds me a bit of the ones in Lisbon Portugal, Wish there were more city sets that included tram tracks and the overhead catenary (wire)
Now this product did raise my eyebrows last night as the names of some of the weapons after the "FG" are of actual firearms makers.
https://www.daz3d.com/fg-modern-weapon
kyoto kid, this tram is really adorable! I live in a city with (modern) trams and know their practical advantages, so I am a particular fan of this means of transport. Here, too, the historic carriages are used for special occasions; you can drink coffee or have parties in them while being driven through the city. Real fun!
..we used to have four "vintage" trams that would run on the two tram lines we have in the city centre during weekends. They were actually newly nuilt but fairly faithful replicas of the original Brill 1903 Council Crest cars that used to operate here decades ago. Two of the original 4 cars built were sold to St Louis in 2014 while the remaining 2 are now in service on the Willamette Shore Trolley line.
Council Crest is one of the highest vantage in Portland at just about 1,000' in height and offers a wonderful 180° scenic view of the city. Council Crest also had an amusement at the top as well which operated from 1907 to 1929.
Original Council Crest car
1991 replica.:
Mt. Hood from Council Crest park
Actually, this can vary by country. Italy in particular has taken a very agressive stance on commercial usage of their classical artworks from centuries ago that are supposedly in the public domain. The museam in Italy has not only sued multiple companies, it WON. I don't know how they consider them to be public domain if they are not free to use, but that is their policy.
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/ravensburger-da-vinci-vitruvian-man-puzzle-ruling-gallerie-dell-accademia-2276738
https://www.city.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2021/08/how-could-an-italian-gallery-sue-over-use-of-its-public-domain-art
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7801a221-7163-477b-91a0-c57c3b7a2416
This all started happening fairly recently. I suppose this means that Daz cannot sell a Statue of David like product, in spite of its age, since David is one specific example.
well that's pretty bleak for the future, give lawyers an inch
if centuries old stuff starts getting copyrighted we are doomed as much architecture etc inspired by it
The bridge is fine to use.
This is definitely crazy and it shouldn't be valid outside of Italy. You may have discussions for items that resemble statues like David as well.
So, I wonder, where this will lead together with AI stuff, when they learn on italien art...
I got a kick out of the Astoria Riverfront Trolley in Oregon. Since there's no overhead wire on its route, it pulls a small trailer containing a diesel generator to supply the power. It's a bit of a shock at first, seeing a trolley car trundling along but with no visible overhead wire or poles.
IMO it really is messed up. People will still desire to go to the museums to see these works in person because that is an experience you cannot replicate with a photo...or a jiggsaw puzzle. Italy has essentially made a law that allows copyright to last forever, and I think that is a tragedy. If Italy can do it, then it is only a matter of time before mega corporations get their way to make copyrights truly last forever. Disney has managed to extend them to an absurd 90 years as it is.
I think it is fine to have strong copyright laws for a period of time, but not 90 years and certainly not forever. Copyrights that go for 90 years only serve companies.
I am surprised that Italy can do this, the puzzle company is located in Germany. The website is American though it has users in Italy. I thought local laws would take precedence.
But whatever. I suppose the answer is to never reference Italian art again.
That depends on how "David-like" a statute is...
(Above: A historically accurate 3D sculpt of the famous statue "La Patata Gigant di nome Spudzo" that once stood upon the roof of the Medici Potato Exchange in Florence)
Few people know the real history behind the statue... or statues as is more accurate...
"La Patata Gigant di nome Spudzo" (or as he was originally known "Spudzo") was actually the original source material that Michelangelo used to base his interpretation of biblical David on.
Spudzo was actually commissioned by a lesser known member of the Medici family, Zamboni di' Medici, who was a bit of a black sheep in their banking clan for having shunned the high profile of finance for a less dramatic life as a potato and ice merchant (since Roman times, wealthy Italians would get their frozen treats from ice imported from the Alpine glaciers)... Zamboni who is all but forgotten today felt much gratitude to his older fatter brother Spudzo who always encouraged him to pursue his dreams...
Zamboni loved potatoes and frozen potato slurry, so he made that his business and was very successful at it... as a tribute to both his brother who was quite potato-like in appearance, and to the biblical David who murdered an annoying giant who made fun of his nudity, Zamboni commissioned a bronze statue of his potato-like brother (who was also quite fond of nudity, often parading about in nothing but a fig leaf, which was the bare minimum attitude allowed in Renaissance Florence at the time), poised like David after he slew the giant with nothing but an old sweat sock laced with poison.
In 1459 Zamboni went to the little known Ninja Turtle sculptor Denato di Niccoló Betto Bardi (or as we know him today "Donatello") and asked him to sculpt his vision of "Spudzo" as a 25 foot tall gleaming white Carrara marble statue. Donatello accepted the challenge and worked furiously on the statue and a smaller, more human looking version (in case case Spudzo was offended by his portrayal as a potato). Donatello was able to complete the main statue, but before he was able to finish the backup version, he was murdered by his nemesis Utromo di Shreddereti (or "Shredder" as he is more commonly known).
Saddened by the death of Donatello, Zamboni had the statue placed on the roof of his headquarters in Florence, where it became known as "La Patata Gigant di nome Spudzo"...
Unfortunately Spudzo was offended by the statue, despite the exacting physical similarities and stunningly similar nudity it portrayed in honor of him. Without a backup statue to swap out, Zamboni didn't know what to do, and to complicate matters, The Great Potato Bubble burst, sending potato futures plummeting and leaving Zamboni struggling to at least keep his ice business afloat. With no money available to remove the statue or complete the other one, the "La Patata Gigant di nome Spudzo" remained in place.
It was quite popular in Florence for many years and many people travelled from afar to see it.
Sadly the potato exchange headquarters where it stood fell into neglect and the massive weight of the statue caused the roof to collapse one day, crushing Zamboni and his pet orangutan to death, shattering the statue into zillions of tiny fragments.
Feeling responsible for Zamboni's untimely comical death, other members of the Medici family commissioned another Ninja Turtle sculptor, Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni (or "Michelangelo" as we known him today) to complete the other unfinished statue. The unfinished work, know as "il Gigante" (meaning the big human, possibly of giant sized proportions) was taken out of storage and transformed by Michelangelo into the statue we know today as "David" or "That big naked guy with the fig leaf over his wiener".
Not wanting to stir up bad feelings the Medici family had the other statue renamed "David" but unfortunately for them they got kicked out of Florence for bad behavior and The Overseers of the Office of Works, known as the Operai del Duomo, who were officers of the Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore, the organisation charged with the construction and maintenance of the new Cathedral of Florence took over the project and in June of 1504 the statue was re-renamed "David" and was installed next to the entrance to the Palazzo della Signoria, replacing Donatello's bronze sculpture of Judith and Holofernes, were it stood until 1873 when it was removed for repairs and to add a fashionable fig leaf, which Michelangelo (being a nudity enthusiast) had neglected to add.
The fig leaf was eventually lost in subsequent movements and restorations and today stands in full wieneristic glory in the Galleria dell'Accademia.
But, the point of this story isn't the origins of David or Spudzo, but that technically neither statue was every officially struck with the copyright "C" ("il Copyrito") symbol because Donatello died before he could do so, and Michelangelo overlooked that detail... so technically these works are not copyrighted and according to ancient laws, public domain for eternity or until a zombie version of the original creator can challenge this in a court of law.
...so will La Patata Gigant di nome Spudzo be in your freebie gallery soon?.
Eventually... probably?... I hope. I'm really easily distracted... I made that over a year ago and haven't touched it since I sculpted the fig leaf... I was too lazy to sculpt any of the details under it either... poor Spudzo... he's as smooth a potato... well, those fancy yellow ones, not the Idaho ones... thems is some lumpy spuds...
Hey... spuds... Spudzo... that's a weird coincidence.
That (how long ago it was built) hasn't stopped the French government from raising issues if/when people "appropriate" the Eiffel Tower, a copy of which is sold on DAZ, so that might be a problem. Not sure where I read that, but with an accurate google search, the info should be easily found. Copyright law varies from country to country, and in some cases, it is simply insane (IMHO).
Correct. See my comment above about the Eiffel Tower. This stuff is a little more complicated than Sir Richard thinks =) Always ask a lawyer when in doubt because ignorance of the law ("Gosh, Richard told me it was Ok) is not a viable defense.
its the lighting display on the Eiffel Tower that's copyrighted
it has come up before
As far as I know, the copyright issue with the Eiffel Tower is actually the light displays at night, where the designs are created recently. I don't however know whether that's deliberately engineered to try to get copyright control.
Personally, I think I'd argue that a display that public is not reasonably copyrightable (nor, to be honest, demonstrates enough original work), and the commission should be done under the understanding that ownership of the work passes to the public, so it feels like it's that kind of shenanigans, but I don't know that for sure
The laws applicable to you in your country apply to you. It is a principal of national sovereignity. If you are in Italy and make a model of David, then it's perfectly reasonable that the Italian law will apply to you, which may prevent its distribution.
If I were to make such a model in the UK without ever having been to Italy or seen the statue in person, I would be quite surprised/amazed/flaberghasted if anybody from Italy tried to enforce their own internal national law in the UK, if such a law were not backed by an international treaty to which the UK was a signatory. The UK is a signatory to the international copyright conventions, but I remain to be convinced that the Italian extension to such national law has any validity under the international conventions - which tend to be the minimum shared between nations because that's all that can be agreed by every signatory. In the UK there is a UK wide national freedom built into UK national copyright law, that any copyright article may be copied once by the user for the user's personal use. OK, doesn't permit sales of copies of copyright materials, but it does apply to all items that are copyright. More detail below:
"In the UK copyright law was amended in 2014, in Statutory Instrument SI2014/2361 "COPYRIGHT: RIGHTS IN PERFORMANCES: The Copyright and Rights in Performances (Personal Copies for Private Use) Regulations 2014" to say:
A link to the legislation is below so you can see the full text:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014 ... 361_en.pdf and the original Act of Parliament it affects (the Copyright & Patents Act, 1988): http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/enacted
This legislation came into force on 1 October 2014. It isn't a fascinating read, but does clarify the situation for UK residents. It should be noted that this right to copy applies to UK residents regardless of whether the copyright holder is based in the UK or not. As usual, the title (mentioning 'Performances') is entirely misleading & maintains Westminster's position as the most obtuse and confusing legislature on the planet."
Regards
Richard.
The bridge model talked about, since FaerylWoman didn't link to it, is this one:
https://www.daz3d.com/fn-bridge
Well, Italy sued a German puzzle company and a US based website in two different cases.
The Statue of David lawsuit targeted the Italian version of the magazine. I didn't look to see if the cover was sold outside Italy (the article I found was paywalled.)
But in the first two cases Italy went beyond its border and effected all use of the works in question, not just products sold or used in Italy.
The US has exceptions for parody, so maybe a Potato of David could be ok. But does Italy allow a similar exception? A number of countries don't follow that rule.
Oops, I forgot the link, my bad. Thanks for the heads up and will add it to the first post.
It could be related to an EU regulation (for Germany), or some obscure rule inside a trade treaty signed with the EU for other cases.
It could be indeed EU related, but that's the thing. There are trade agreements that concern copyrights between countries. That was a big sticking point with the Trans Pacific Partnership a few years ago, which originally sought to create a world wide standard copyright of "lifetime PLUS 70 years after death". Thankfully this particular section was removed. But trade agreements do set standards for copyrights, and Italy's special provision could be included in agreements with the EU and beyond. It could even inspire other countries to do the same...it would an easy source of revenue.
I am no expert on this subject, I am just trying to provide caution. I personally hate copyright as it stands today. It doesn't serve its original purpose anymore. I personally don't believe a copyright should last a lifetime. But that's a rant for another day.