-1

As I asked above .Is it a copyright infringement or not. If it is ,what to change in order to make an original content. originalnew image

closed as unclear what you're asking by mayersdesign, Zach Saucier, Scott, Luciano, WELZ Feb 11 at 14:24

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    What's the situation here - where are the images from? What aspects are you worried about being copied? – Zach Saucier Feb 9 at 20:00
  • No i just want to know the line between inspiration and copying the image is from behance – Yousef Mohamed abdel fattah Feb 9 at 20:02
  • It is from deffrent artists the second artist said the painting inspired him – Yousef Mohamed abdel fattah Feb 9 at 20:03
  • 1
    If you are asking whether making a derivative image is copyright infringement, then the answer is yes. – Billy Kerr Feb 10 at 13:42
  • 2
    Please edit your question and write a proper question, with words. Read How to Ask to learn how to do it. – Luciano Feb 11 at 9:59
0

You cannot decide exactly has a copyright infrigement happened when you compare two images. There's no measurement tool for it. Every case is different.

Even in case you see that the other image is only a recolored version of the first image, it's not sure. Why: Both of them can be slight variations of a third image which is in public domain. Or this all happens in a place where copyright is not a relevant thing at all.

As well both images can be totally different, but somehow the maker of the first image can extract one detail which seems to be exactly replicated in the other - at least, if some visually easy transformation is applied such as stretching, rotation or recoloring. If the maker of the first image or his lawyer is clever enough, he can build a plausible story how just this detail is the decisive part of the whole case. If he's lucky and prepared the case carefully, he can succeed to cash every penny that the maker of the second image has got. It's not what the other has done, it's what the first can persuade the court to believe.

Sometimes finding the right detail can be easy. Think for example a fast food restaurant who has an yellowish W on red background. If the restaurant is well visible and seems to have got money, quite soon someone knocks the door without thinking to bring money in, I believe.

Finally the copyrighted thing or the thing that the creator claims to be the most essential thing can be a relation, it's not at all a geometric shape. Nobody can be sure has he noticed all relations in an image. Maybe not, if someone knocks the door and wants his money.

In your example one can find quite many same relations. I have no knowledge of does the first creator of them consider them essential nor could he persuade the judge in a court of law think they are essential.

The question has also the ethical side. Do you think that I would buy your maybe finest quality and flashy work if I suspected you have taken an already existing work and carefully applied all your knowledge to make an unprovable variation.

Suspect? I maybe could somehow see the sameness despite all of your efforts or the creator of the original (or his friend or your enemy) succeeded to make me suspicious or you have one case behind you where you already have been caught.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.