Removing Watermarks

fwor

lozzer wrote: »

If your photo has a watermark you have stolen it, simple as that.

I agree with the idea that people should be rewarded for their creative work, but I don't think it's a simple as that.

If people place one of their photos in the public domain with a watermark included, they do so for a reason, and that reason varies. Some (such as Ebay sellers) may just want to make it inconvenient for other sellers to re-use their photos. Others may do so because they want to sell the "unwatermarked" version to you.

Whatever their motive, they have placed it in the public domain.

If you (the OP) want to use your creative talents to Paintshop or Gimp out the watermark, that's Ok - you'll probably spent a few hours doing so and in the process you will have created a completely separate work. If your Paintshop/Gimp skills are like mine then the result will be very poor, but there is a very good chance that you're better at it, and it will only be fairly poor.

Marty_J

Just because something is publicly viewable or accessible does not mean it is in the public domain. All artistic work is copyrighted once it exists in a tangible form. The act of letting people view your work does not magically mean it is no longer copyrighted.

fwor

Ok, but you surely have to admit that this is still a grey area, and probably always will be.

If I download an image that someone has made "publicly accessible", and edit it with Photoshop or the Gimp or whatever so that only one pixel of their original content remains, is the resulting image still their copyrighted property?

Marty_J

Of course not; it would be a totally different image.

However, that's not the same thing as removing the watermark from a photo.

fwor

Marty_J wrote: »

Of course not; it would be a totally different image.

So... in removing the watermark, how much of a change would make it a "totally different image"?

I'm not trying to start an argument here. My point is that if you use your own creative talents (of which I have next to none) to replace the watermark, how much of the result is "yours", and how much the original copyright owner?

Hence my suggestion that it is and will remain a grey area.

Marty_J

It's not really a "grey area". If enough of the original work remains to be identifiable, then you've got yourself a derivative work, for which you'll need the original copyright holders permission.

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p22_derivative_works.en.htm