Xref: utzoo comp.graphics:14469 misc.legal:22676 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!swatsun!swatsun!gessel From: gessel@carthage.cs.swarthmore.edu (Daniel Mark Gessel) Newsgroups: comp.graphics,misc.legal Subject: Re: Copyright status of rotoscoping? Message-ID: Date: 16 Nov 90 20:21:29 GMT References: <39626@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> Sender: news@cs.swarthmore.edu Organization: Swarthmore College, Swarthmore Pa. Lines: 26 In-Reply-To: faustus@ygdrasil.Berkeley.EDU's message of 16 Nov 90 18:26:59 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: carthage In article <39626@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> faustus@ygdrasil.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes: Rotoscoping is the practice of taking footage of live actors and using it as a guide for animated sequences. For example, one might analyse the walking movements of Marilyn Monroe and use it to guide a Jessica Rabbit type of character. (This is probably a more liberal usage of the term than usual.) What I'm curious about is the copyright status of the animated work. Can it be considered a derivative work of the original footage? Is there any legal precedent one way or another? Thanks, Wayne I expect it hasn't been decided. But most rotoscoping is done off of footage that the animators shoot as part of production. If you rotoscope off of somebody elses work, I would expect it would depend on exactly how much you rip off. Doing a caricature of Marilyn Monroe is not a violation (I wouldn't think) and you'd probably use old films as reference, but If you trace it, I would expect trouble. Dan -- Daniel Mark Gessel Independent Software Consultant Internet: gessel@cs.swarthmore.edu and Developer My opinions are not necessarily representative of those of Swarthmore College.