"Most artists retain rights to their works, even if they are commissioned, so likely not. Unless you had a contract with him stating you gained all rights, then he's safe."
-Depends on the country and local laws governing. In Canada (where I live) art commissioned is copyright the person commissioning the art. (Work for Hire Laws). Photographers, Painters, Sculptors etc. have to have the copyright assigned back to them via a legal agreement, usually part of the contract they work under if they want the copyright- these laws differ place to place though.
As to the IOC holding the rights, unless you had a model release (needed for buildings and such too sometimes if it's recognizable) they should be able to license "how" you use the images - a public performance like putting them on flickr - may very well be contrary to their acceptable use of the recognizable aspects of the event, players etc. The artist would still hold the copyright of the images, but not the right to display them publicly. Of course, those laws would be subject to change depending on country/state laws etc. as well I think.
Good to know that you at least can post a sarcastic comment without giving it away with silly jokes, and that very few people are able to read the sarcasm in it.
"Man in the Street"'s sarcasm generator needs calibration." - I don't really think so, I think you need to read this paragraph again:
"In the end, it doesn't matter how flimsy or made-up the evidence is, we know that BREIN is gonna prevail in court regardless. Just look at the way they ran the trial in the first place with weak evidence and still won to see how. They are the ones looking after the interests of very large, legitimate businesses, so they deserve to win in any way possible."
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by suprspi.
Re: Next thing you know..
-Depends on the country and local laws governing. In Canada (where I live) art commissioned is copyright the person commissioning the art. (Work for Hire Laws). Photographers, Painters, Sculptors etc. have to have the copyright assigned back to them via a legal agreement, usually part of the contract they work under if they want the copyright- these laws differ place to place though.
As to the IOC holding the rights, unless you had a model release (needed for buildings and such too sometimes if it's recognizable) they should be able to license "how" you use the images - a public performance like putting them on flickr - may very well be contrary to their acceptable use of the recognizable aspects of the event, players etc. The artist would still hold the copyright of the images, but not the right to display them publicly. Of course, those laws would be subject to change depending on country/state laws etc. as well I think.
Re: Forged docs ok
Good to know that you at least can post a sarcastic comment without giving it away with silly jokes, and that very few people are able to read the sarcasm in it.
"Man in the Street"'s sarcasm generator needs calibration." - I don't really think so, I think you need to read this paragraph again:
"In the end, it doesn't matter how flimsy or made-up the evidence is, we know that BREIN is gonna prevail in court regardless. Just look at the way they ran the trial in the first place with weak evidence and still won to see how. They are the ones looking after the interests of very large, legitimate businesses, so they deserve to win in any way possible."
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by suprspi.
Submit a story now.