Say I take  this pic:    and turn it into this (plus adding title and name of author):    And then use it as a cover for a book at Amazon.  Is that copyright infringement?
121863
Under the U.S.'s Copyright Law, would it be an act of copyright infringement if we were to change the color of another artist's image to black and white?  The answer to this question is provided . For further information, please check out , which is also provided below.  This question was asked to make it clear for those who may think that by changing the color or the size of another artist's work, you did not violate the U.S Copyright Law, which is not true.  Instead of trying to manipulate another artist's image to entitle ourselves as the "original" owner, the right and proper action is to request the permission to use it.
120319
I am taking an online class that requires a textbook to be purchased. I have found the book through my first simple search using the Google search engine. The website where I found the book seems to be foreign and not related to the original authors. Is it ethical for me to use the free version that I have easily found online and not purchase the book? Edit: I think there is a valid distinction between resources found on controversial websites like SciHub and the Google search engine. Furthermore, my intentions were to purchase the book before I stumbled upon it in the first few search results.
91547
I mean, can I copy part of the content and put it in a website?  Can questions be distributed or published?
93217
I just ran into an answer in which the author included a link to a PDF book that was licensed only to them. I'm pretty sure this is copyrighted material and the author does not want copies of the book to be freely available on the web.   What is the proper etiquette in this situation? Leave a comment? (I can't yet, I just joined.) Mark as offensive? Contact a moderator?
14826
Lets say I write a blog post about the new Batman movie or a the new Grand Theft Auto game and i decide to use the boxart/poster or a wallpaper as the main image for the blog post,  can I be sued for breach of copyright on this image?  Im pretty sure Warner Bros are going to be hunting anyone down even if it is legal, but is this actually legal? If i buy the DVD or Game and take a picture of it, is this my copyright? When a trailer gets released and put on youTube, can i take a screenshot of this video and use this as an image?  It seems people can get rightly screwed for this, so I would like to know where i stand on this sort of thing.
82650
This is a follow-up question to , and is somehow related to   However, my question does not concern the reviews I receive for the papers I submit, but concerns the reviews I write for papers I have been assigned. Since the whole process is done under confidentiality, it is not clear who owns the copyright on a review I wrote, and what does the review include.   For instance, let us assume that X is member of a PC of a conference Y, and assigns to me a review of a paper Z, written by A and B (assuming it's not a double-blind). Can I publish on my blog: "Here is my review for Y, asked by X, on the paper Z, written by A and B"?   I think that there are two points here:    Is it legal? (for instance, publishing the camera-ready version of a paper might be illegal due to the copyright transfer, would it be also the care here?).  Is it ethical? (who should I ask in order to do so? X? Y? A and B? everybody?).    EDIT: There is been several comments/answer wondering why I would like to publish a review I wrote. To give a bit of background of this question, I believe that the current reviewing system, created when the academic community was small and there was no Internet (i.e. no easy access to information), might not be the best, although clearly working. This is for me a very interesting debate, but somehow out of the scope the Q&amp;A format of Academia SE, which is why I tried to focus on my question on whether it was possible to do so, not if it was the best thing to do in the current system (and just to be clear, I don't plan to do it, but I just like to know what are my options). Anyway, thanks for the answers bringing a different light on this debate.   EDIT 2: After seeing the update in Jeff's answer, I just realised that I didn't make it explicit that I was talking about reviews after the reviewing process. Jeff says that it's ok if the paper is accepted, and although I clearly understand the argument of why I shouldn't publish a review of a rejected paper, the question still holds: by publishing a review of a rejected paper, I publish the information that these authors submitted this paper to this conf/journal, which is supposed to be confidential between the authors and the editors. Would I break any rule by doing so?
33148
I am writing my thesis and came across an image on Wikipedia that I would like to use. The licensing on this image is:     I, the copyright holder of this work, release this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide.   In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:   I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.   Should I still include a reference to indicate this image is not my own work, if so, who should be given credit (the author is not known in this case)?
69984
when I was at design college 2013 we were told (for educational purposes) that we could use images from the net (only photographs) to incorporate into designs for posters, collages, magazine covers, etc, and that we obviously could not make any money from these designs, but that we could use them in our portfolio. Is this true or false? I now have an FB page and, as a recent graduate, want to put up some of these designs on my page. But is that copyright, or is it permissible as an example for work I've done, so long as no money is being made from it? Do I need to state that photography wasn't original? (I'm not even sure now where I got them from!) I usually put a copyright label on my posted works to cover myself, but if the above described is permissible, then do I need to not use that copyright label as its not completely original? (because I have used some photographs from the net which have then been rearranged/edited/etc etc and incorporated into a design).  Any help would be much appreciated! Thanks!
122479
My wife recently got a logo designed for her new business, by a professional branding company. It went through several stages of approval, getting the logo just right, however, when she went on to the next stage of the process (creating the social media pages) she was asked to find some stock images to use for the banners.  While doing so, she found her "logo" was taken exactly from an existing stock image. The only modification done was to add a little bit of color and her business name.    I don't know the proper etiquette for this situation is. Is it bad that her logo is a stock image and if so, is it too late in the process to request a change (note they claim to allow unlimited revisions but I'm not sure if that applies once we "accept" the design).  Stock Image:   Logo:
18310
I want to make this for my cover page, to write over an image. Any advice will be very well received.
72852
Suppose a commercial organisation decided to create a Q&amp;A site that had the look and feel of Stack Overflow, calling itself Stocks&amp;sharesOverflow.com, with a logo inspired by, but sufficiently different from stackexchange.com.  A  stated that look and feel of a site isn't copyrightable, but what about modifying the name and logo of stackoverflow.com to maintain the same "feel"?
107309
Is it legal republish any article with Credits and Canonical Link?  After the end of the post I will mention a note like Originally published at www.example.com/post.  Additionally I will add a canonical tag too that post.
57876
What with  today, possibly this is a good time to ask: who actually owns the copyright to questions, answers and comments submitted to StackOverflow and relatives?  Over in , we have the OP reaching the conclusion that SO owns the copyright and is licensing it under CC-Attribution-Sharealike, with no apparent confirmation or denial from staff, and in  we have a moderator asserting that Jeff owns the copyright to SO content.  As I note in a comment on the latter, though (which was met with deafening silence), I'm failing to find any evidence that this is the case.  I've looked for any kind of terms of service I may have agreed to indicating that I am signing over ownership of my words when I hit submit, and I can't find one.  Certainly the fact that I'm agreeing to CC-Attribution-Sharealike licensing is clear enough, but it seems to me as if I am retaining copyright while agreeing to those licensing terms, and S[OFU] is using what I have written under that license.  What's the deal?  Did I forget about something that I agreed to in the signup process (and if so, why can't I find it afterward)?  Do the owners and administrators of S[OFU] believe that they own copyright to the UGC?  Just what is going on here?  Edit as to why this matters (from answer comment thread): If I retain copyright, I can also choose to license the original content to other parties under other terms (such as using a zero-requirements license, using an attribution-required license without sharealike, etc). If SO has the copyright, I can't.
16841
I have photos in Getty Images, in Shutterstock, Imagekind and I recently added some to RedBubble, but I'm not having the expected results.  Does anyone have some history of success selling photographs or working as a photographer?  Examples of my work are available in .    Also asked by   I am an amateur who sometimes takes pictures of nature or random things. I've been told by several people that my pictures are worth money.  How can I monetize my best shots?  I don't really want to do a lot of work, editing, SEO or whatever. I'm looking for an easy way where I would just upload my pictures somewhere and let it go.  Maybe stock photos? People buying prints? I have no idea how that works...  EDIT: maybe a link to see which type of photography I do can help
36124
I have designed a logo for a non-profit that I want to allow different committees to use it, but I don't want them to be able to alter anything but the size.  I have created the design as a vector image(all font saved as outlines) with transparent background and with separate versions for black, greyscale at 80%, white to print on dark backgrounds and a specified color.  The skill of members varies as does their printers, some barely know what a jpeg is, others are prepping brochures for press printing, others are using the image on the web and for email.  I know I can take most image formats and extract, distort, erase, change colors, superimpose other elements etc.  I don't want others to be able to do this without permission from the organization board.  Using illustrator in CS5 on iMac 27" OS X 10.10.4
124258
My company bought  and wants to trademark it by adding some words with different colors.   Do you know anything about if this is legal since we purchase the vector art?
92496
I was searching through StackOverflow, and found a question with one answer. I found the text of the answer very familiar, and realized it was a direct copy and paste from my blog, with no attribution as to the source.   Naturally I'm happy that people think my writing is helpful, I'd like credit for my copy. I'm not sure what the protocol is. Should I directly ask the user (first answer they've submitted) to update the answer to include a link? Should I report it somewhere?