Splitcoaststampers.com - the world's #1 papercrafting community
You're currently viewing Splitcoaststampers as a GUEST. We pride ourselves on being great hosts, but guests have limited access to some of our incredible artwork, our lively forums and other super cool features of the site! You can join our incredible papercrafting community at NO COST. So what are you waiting for?
This is kind of a spin-off from the image borrowing/stealing thread...
How do y'all feel about scanning an image to resize it for your own personal use? Not selling the project, not swapping; just for your own personal use. For example, I have some flower images that I wish were bigger and would like to make cut-outs of. They only come in that one size, so it's not like I can buy a bigger size. Would it be wrong just to make a couple copies of that image for myself? I've thought about it but I don't want to violate any company's policy or offend anyone.
Location: I had no idea it could snow this much in the desert!
Posts: 2,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's funny you'd ask that, I was just thinking the same thing a few nights ago. I have a very small bunny stamp, but he's just not big enough for what I had planned for him. I wondered if the angel policy that some companies have would cover that (?)
By subscribing to this thread, I hope to find out too.
P.S. Hi again! I love to "see familiar faces" here at SCS and I'm having a great time with the images we swapped
__________________ My Avatars? My sweet, lovable, handsome sons, and new baby girl. *MY GALLERY*
My copyright terms (Elzybells Art Stamps) state that amending our designs in any way is strictly prohibited, so yes, what you propose would indeed be a breach of our copyright.
I would assume that other stamp companies would not want you to amend their designs in any way either.
All the policies I've ever seen (maybe four or five...not an expert here!) have said modifying designs is strictly prohibited. I know exactly how you feel, though. Size counts in stamping, and it can be so frustrating to have the perfect image and not be able to make it fit.
I would think as long as you are using them strictly for personal use - not selling or submitting for publication - it would be okay. Technically against the rules, but who's going to hunt you down for sending a modified flower image to your grandma? You're not stealing the image - you paid for it - so do what you will for your *personal* use. That's my opinion.
__________________ Debra ---artist * teacher * designer Say yes. Be generous. Speak up. Love more. Trust yourself. Slow down. ---Patti Digh
I believe that copyright laws alow you to "copy" and use something for your own personal use as long as you physically destroy the item when you are finished. Like if you are writing a report, you can copy a page from a book at the library that you are reserching, but since the item is under copyright laws you must destroy the copy when you are finished with your report. So if you copied the image then you would have to destroy it when your finished.
I would think as long as you are using them strictly for personal use - not selling or submitting for publication - it would be okay. Technically against the rules, but who's going to hunt you down for sending a modified flower image to your grandma? You're not stealing the image - you paid for it - so do what you will for your *personal* use. That's my opinion.
You paid for the image that you received -- not a modified version of it. Like others have posted, most stamp companies have policies saying that no mechanical reproduction is allowed. This includes photocopying stamps, scanning them, copying designs from the website, as well as electronically manipulating them -- such as changing the size. Some companies sell the same design in different sizes, so if this practice were allowed, they wouldn't need to sell other sizes because people could turn it into whatever size they wanted.
In krabearkub's example of "fair use," you can use something that's copyrighted such as a page from a book -- but you can't change the words on that page to make it say what you "need" it to say for your purposes. Same with the stamp designs. You can use them (stamp with them) as they appear, but you can't change them to suit your needs. Although if you only want to use PARTS of the original design -- such as mask off a section -- I think that is okay because you are still stamping the original design, and not making changes to the parts that are used. Same as if you copy a paragraph from an article and not the whole page. KWIM?
A wrong thing is still wrong whether you're found out or not; otherwise, shoplifting would only be a crime if you were actually caught.
All too often, consumers do not recognize that when they buy a stamp, they have purchased a limited license to reproduce the image as specified by the copyright holder; the consumer doesn't own the artwork. They own rubber and a block of wood, or the clear photopolymer that the image was produced on, but, not the artwork itself.
Whether or not it's OK to alter the original in any way, via mechanical means, regardless of personal use or commercial use, depends on what the copyright holder has specified. If they prohibit it, then legally, it's not OK.
Knowingly doing it, based on the personal opinion that it "should" be OK or the assumption that one is unlikely to be caught for doing it, is a question of individual ethics.
To the OP: I would recommend contacting the copyright holder of the image and inquiring, if you cannot find information at their website regarding this particular topic, because some may indeed allow this in their Angel Policy, and others may not. And, you will be comfortable in knowing that you verified what's OK, straight from the horse's mouth. ;)
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
P.S. I couldn't answer your poll, because speaking for myself only, I would abide by what the copyright holder specifies as OK, and that wasn't listed as an option. ;)
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
All too often, consumers do not recognize that when they buy a stamp, they have purchased a limited license to reproduce the image as specified by the copyright holder; the consumer doesn't own the artwork. They own rubber and a block of wood, or the clear photopolymer that the image was produced on, but, not the artwork itself.
Very well put! And such an important point that I think all of us stampers need to know. I'm glad the OP started this thread and that some stamp company owners have responded (waving hi 'across the pond' to Elizabeth -- creator of some of my very favorite images!). I think sometimes in our enthusiasm to create something new and different with our stamps, we stamp lovers forget about all of the meticulous, painstaking work that goes into making our favorite products.
All too often, consumers do not recognize that when they buy a stamp, they have purchased a limited license to reproduce the image as specified by the copyright holder; the consumer doesn't own the artwork. They own rubber and a block of wood, or the clear photopolymer that the image was produced on, but, not the artwork itself.
Whether or not it's OK to alter the original in any way, via mechanical means, regardless of personal use or commercial use, depends on what the copyright holder has specified. If they prohibit it, then legally, it's not OK.
Knowingly doing it, based on the personal opinion that it "should" be OK or the assumption that one is unlikely to be caught for doing it, is a question of individual ethics.
To the OP: I would recommend contacting the copyright holder of the image and inquiring, if you cannot find information at their website regarding this particular topic, because some may indeed allow this in their Angel Policy, and others may not. And, you will be comfortable in knowing that you verified what's OK, straight from the horse's mouth. ;)
That's exactly what I was going to bring up, if you you stamp it on shrink plastic, and it's reduced by shrinking it, isn't that mechanical manipulation? I don't see how it's different from scanning and shrinking on a copier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skittl1321
I would say no- that's mechanical manipulation. But if you want it smaller- shrink plastic is allowable!
That's exactly what I was going to bring up, if you you stamp it on shrink plastic, and it's reduced by shrinking it, isn't that mechanical manipulation? I don't see how it's different from scanning and shrinking on a copier.
I would say it's because they still have to be hand stamped one at a time. If you scan it and shrink it on a copier you could print out 1000 at a time without extra effort.
That's exactly what I was going to bring up, if you you stamp it on shrink plastic, and it's reduced by shrinking it, isn't that mechanical manipulation? I don't see how it's different from scanning and shrinking on a copier.
An image that has been hand-stamped onto polyshrink and subsequently heated, has not been manipulated/altered or reproduced by mechanical means (scanning, reducing, other alteration via a copier, computer, etc.).
I could hand-stamp an image onto a Tshirt, and if the shirt, and therefore, the image, shrank in the wash, I still would not have done so by use of mechanical means.
Does that make sense?
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
Location: Where the water meets the sand in So Cali
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it just depends on the use. I actually emailed a popular stamp company here on SCS asking about such a use of an image because I needed it to be about 3 feet high. It tied in with the use of the same image throughout the party. I got personal permission to do what I did for that ONE instance. And it was AWESOME! I HAD purchased the original stamp. I have purchased MANY stamps from the company. I wouldn't do it for personal gain. I'm a big proponant of just purchasing the item for my purpose no matter if I'll ever use it again or not. I would NOT want to invest the time/money/blood/sweat/tears that all the wonderful stamp companies do to make the products, so I'll just be happy that they allow me to purchase their artwork!
Why are gallery and blog pictures okay? Is this not mechanical reproduction?
Generally speaking, it would not be OK hand-stamp the images, and upload a photograph of the images themselves in a black & white reproducible/alterable format. A finished/completed artwork, that incorporates the images, would not be so easily susceptible to mechanical reproduction or alteration, infringement, etc. which is why most companies do allow finished artworks containing their images to appear online.
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
So call me what you will, but sometimes laws are just...not right. I don't advocate shoplifting or ignoring stop signs because people can/may get hurt. But I find it silly not to be able to use the stamps I've purchased, in the way I want to *in my personal art.* Is that unethical to me? I don't think so. My guideline is often, "Will anyone be hurt or put in danger?" If I went to a website, copied the images and then printed them out, *that* would be stealing, depriving the artists and companies their dues. I wouldn't do that. Using stamps I purchased in my personal work is neither harmful nor putting anyone in danger. If anyone wants to send the copyright police to me, PM me and I'll give you my address. :P
__________________ Debra ---artist * teacher * designer Say yes. Be generous. Speak up. Love more. Trust yourself. Slow down. ---Patti Digh
ok, I originally voted yes until I actually read what you were asking and realized you were talking about scanning a stamped image. Ok, yeah, I dont think that I am comfortable with doing that myself, (and at least SU! policy is against this, right?).
Yikes! this is completely confusing but such a good discussion.
I hold my hand up - I downloaded a free decoupage sheet and only used the base image and I think I printed it on an overhead and actually used the reverse image as it fit with the design. I did NOT however sell it nor profit from doing this. So I did answer Yes - because I did download the image from a free download site and I didn't feel I could lie.
I have to add to this discussion that noticed there was a thread a few weeks ago about using a Sizzix die cutting machine to get a better impression out of a CHF Thomas Kincade stamp - I did wonder whether this blurred the line of mechanical reproduction.
I also was under the impression that there is a limited number of times an impression can be used by the purchaser for gain - i.e. you can use that stamp 12 times before you are legally supposed to repurchase it, if you are selling your creations.
Great discussion!
Now threadjack time - ellebelle - love your stamps but I LIKE the original sizes and BG's any chance of them coming to the US market or am I going to have to keep on the good side of my English family and friends? :lol:
I have to add to this discussion that noticed there was a thread a few weeks ago about using a Sizzix die cutting machine to get a better impression out of a CHF Thomas Kincade stamp - I did wonder whether this blurred the line of mechanical reproduction.
Woah - hold the phone!!! Using a sizzix to get a better impression? I would love to know where that thread was. I'm having the hardest time with my Thomas Kinkade stamp. I'd be interested in reading what they were talking about. (unless I'd be breaking any laws ;) )
Woah - hold the phone!!! Using a sizzix to get a better impression? I would love to know where that thread was. I'm having the hardest time with my Thomas Kinkade stamp. I'd be interested in reading what they were talking about. (unless I'd be breaking any laws ;) )
I think it was a post by Kurtis -Krabearkub , though apologise if I am wrong.
Thank you everyone for your well thought out responses. This subject can get complicated and muddy sometimes with all the legal mumbo jumbo and the differences between how it is ok sometimes to alter (ex:shrink plastic, masking) and other times it is not ok. Discussion and sharing info is good!:-D
Location: The weeds are popping up, and I'm having asthma issues
Posts: 6,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by greetingsbydebra
So call me what you will, but sometimes laws are just...not right. I don't advocate shoplifting or ignoring stop signs because people can/may get hurt. But I find it silly not to be able to use the stamps I've purchased, in the way I want to *in my personal art.* Is that unethical to me? I don't think so. My guideline is often, "Will anyone be hurt or put in danger?" If I went to a website, copied the images and then printed them out, *that* would be stealing, depriving the artists and companies their dues. I wouldn't do that. Using stamps I purchased in my personal work is neither harmful nor putting anyone in danger. If anyone wants to send the copyright police to me, PM me and I'll give you my address. :P
With so many stamps and images out there for us to buy, I always seem to find something that will work for any of my projects. A couple times I may have thought, *this would be perfect if it was a bit bigger for this card...*, but I look at that as a challenge for me to find something else that will work!
I have not read all of this, so forgive me if I am repeating.
One of the reasons that "items" can be copyrighted is so we (you & I) do not use the item in an inapporpriate way!!!! or make money off the inventors's hard work.
Otherwise you WOULD & HAVE seen (e.g.) mickey mouse & minie mouse doing things that should only be done in a bedroom, smoking, drinking alcohal, etc. I think it was a decade ago (maybe more) that the bar in Fond du Lac, Wis. had to take Snoopy & the dog house off their roof. That sign had been up for decades!! They had to take the sign down. How would you like to see Snow White doing it with a little person? It was done!
This is a way to make sure that the corpyrighted item is not used in a way that the inventor doesn't want and/or someone doesn't make money off of the inventor's hard work or used to promote something the inventor does not like. (Drugs, alcohal, President, anything outside the law, et.)
How is it theft if you've already purchased the stamp???
The image itself is always the intellectual property of the copyright holder - however by purchasing the image (in stamp form in this case) you have been given permission by the copyright holder to use this image in a limited capacity.
The question really is what exactly is the limited capacity?
Yikes! this is completely confusing but such a good discussion.
Yes, it is.
Quote:
I hold my hand up - I downloaded a free decoupage sheet and only used the base image and I think I printed it on an overhead and actually used the reverse image as it fit with the design. I did NOT however sell it nor profit from doing this. So I did answer Yes - because I did download the image from a free download site and I didn't feel I could lie.
I have to add to this discussion that noticed there was a thread a few weeks ago about using a Sizzix die cutting machine to get a better impression out of a CHF Thomas Kincade stamp - I did wonder whether this blurred the line of mechanical reproduction.
The image is still hand-stamped, not being reproduced, scanned or altered by mechanical means (i.e. scanner, photocopier, computer), etc. This would not cross the line.
Quote:
I also was under the impression that there is a limited number of times an impression can be used by the purchaser for gain - i.e. you can use that stamp 12 times before you are legally supposed to repurchase it, if you are selling your creations.
Great discussion!
Every company's Angel Policy specifics what the maximum quantity would be when it comes to stamping the images for profit; since it varies from company to company, just check their policy at their website, or inquire directly with them. :grin:
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
The image itself is always the intellectual property of the copyright holder - however by purchasing the image (in stamp form in this case) you have been given permission by the copyright holder to use this image in a limited capacity.
The question really is what exactly is the limited capacity?
Generally speaking, it means reproducing the image by hand-stamping only, for personal use. Most, if not all, prohibit any mechanical reproduction or alteration of their images.
Some companies, by their Angel Policy, allow the images to be hand-stamped onto items for resale/profit, but they may have restrictions as to the maximum quantity in a one year period.
Some require you to submit the information (i.e. specifically which images you'd like to use, what you'll be stamping, and the quantity) before they'll permit you to hand-stamp for profit; they want to know exactly how their artwork is being used for profit by others and with good reason! As someone already mentioned:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betty_S_K
. . .
One of the reasons that "items" can be copyrighted is so we (you & I) do not use the item in an inapporpriate way!!!! or make money off the inventors's hard work.
Otherwise you WOULD & HAVE seen (e.g.) mickey mouse & minie mouse doing things that should only be done in a bedroom, smoking, drinking alcohal, etc. I think it was a decade ago (maybe more) that the bar in Fond du Lac, Wis. had to take Snoopy & the dog house off their roof. That sign had been up for decades!! They had to take the sign down. How would you like to see Snow White doing it with a little person? It was done!
This is a way to make sure that the corpyrighted item is not used in a way that the inventor doesn't want and/or someone doesn't make money off of the inventor's hard work or used to promote something the inventor does not like. (Drugs, alcohal, President, anything outside the law, et.) . . .
__________________ Julie Ebersole (JulieHRR once upon a time . . . )julieebersole.com"So shines a good deed in a weary world." -Willy Wonka
So the stamping police can come and take me away and clean out my stamp room because DANG it's for you in your home and your not making money from it, you've already paid for it and if you are NOT selling it then it should not matter. Are the copyright fairies going to tattle on you that you scanned an image and transfered it to a piece of metal or put it in a frame above your toilet? I don't think so.
And as far as copyrights go, I appreciate the FBI warnings before you watch a DVD. No copying and public viewing or charging to watch the movie.
BUT you CAN copy it for your own personal copy and movie library.
Sorry if this offends any of the retailers here or the other posters who have voted 'no'.
How do you feel about...
