Capcom stole graphics for resident evil and others

[Brad]

https://www.polygon.com/22519568/resident-evil-4-copyright-infringement-lawsuit-capcom

Looking at the images and reading the story this is pretty cut and dry.

[eastyy]

Still puzzled on how a photograph of something is the copyright claim and not the object that was originally photographed :S

[briareos_kerensky]

I knew about the claim that village stole some monster designs from some obscure (at least for me ) horror movie, but not about these textures.
The case will be pretty soon swept under the rug and settled out of court.

[Mayhem]

Still puzzled on how a photograph of something is the copyright claim and not the object that was originally photographed :S

If you photograph something you own the copyright on the photo even if it’s something you don’t own yourself. I’ve licensed or given rights to use on a few photos I’ve taken over the years for this reason, people requesting permission to use them in something commercial.

[Neon Ignition]

This is the part where we discover RE6's logo is actually truly based off a photo of a woman and a giraffe.

[Adam]

They should get Phoenix Wright to defend them in court.

[nonny]

I knew about the claim that village stole some monster designs from some obscure (at least for me ) horror movie, but not about these textures.
The case will be pretty soon swept under the rug and settled out of court.

Gotta say though the evidence there is pretty damning... It's a carbon copy. Which then gives this new claim more weight as if they've done it once maybe they've done it multiple times.

[Brad]

They have done it multiple times, for
Multiple games. They basically have a cd of her images and just used them as they pleased. This could easily be just one employee that did this though; doesn’t mean capcom are evil lol.

Matt is correct on the copyright stuff, unless you are in France where photographing people you require their permission, plus permission from them every time you want to use that image. Same for any creative work even if it’s in a photo taken from a public place.

[Cassius_Smoke]

It's not even like they took just one of her pictures, they basically took her entirely portfolio.

[briareos_kerensky]

Matt is correct on the copyright stuff, unless you are in France where photographing people you require their permission, plus permission from them every time you want to use that image.

If for commercial use, I think that applies in other countries as well, unless they are public figures?

[Brad]

Nope, specific to France. In France you own the copyright to every photograph of yourself. Everywhere else the photographer owns it. Now, there may be other laws that stop your from using a photograph such as if it suggests something bad about you but like if you took a photo at a football match of some bloke cheering when his team scored a goal then the photographer can use that without permission and make money off it but in France the man in the photo owns the copyright and you would need his permission to use it. I may have mixed things up a bit there but that’s the gist of it.

[112]

Is this bordering into NFT territory?

Only glanced through the original post link, didn’t read too in-depth, so not sure if something like this was mentioned or even applicable…

112

[Golgo]

As far as I can tell the images come from the Surfaces series produced by the artist/designer in question. The books - and their accompanying CD-ROMS - appear to have been compiled specifically as a visual resource and source-book for other artists/designers. Here's the blurb from one of the books, with a few bits highlighted that seem quite specifically to invite borrowings and indeed to make this easy:

"Looking for images of architectural materials? Surfaces offers over 1,200 outstanding, vibrantly colorful visual images of surface textures - wood, stone, marble, brick, plaster, stucco, aggregates, metal, tile, and glass - ready to be used in your designs, presentations, or comps, as backgrounds or for general visual information. Photographed by a designer for designers, these pictures show specific materials and how they change with time, weather, wear, and different lighting. Each section offers general views of the material, a gallery of commonly used or manufactured samples, and hundreds of specimens showing types and finishes in architectural settings. Captions provide information about the physical properties, dimensions, construction techniques, specific varieties of the material, and types and styles of treatments. Interviews with eight design professionals provide practical advice on how they approach visual research, and a comprehensive glossary of visual and technical terms offers a vocabulary for professional communication. An index of subject matter and materials makes it easy to find just the image you need. CD-ROM included: easy-to-use screen resolution TIFF files of every image!"

[briareos_kerensky]

Yeah, but you still need to ask for permission to use them for commercial purposes. It's like an offline Gettyimages, Shutterstock, or similar services. There you need to pay upfront to use unwatermarked images,the book/CD relies on good faith.

[Dogg Thang]

Yep. You need permission.

Related to what Brad was saying about France, there are some buildings that somehow have managed to retain their own copyright so you can’t sell a photograph of them or, in some cases, even depict them in a drawing. Tokyo Tower is one but France stuck in my mind because I think you can show the Eiffel Tower in daytime but you need to license permission to show it at night. I ran into an issue making a background for a game many years ago that was set in Paris and the night art had to be redone to day.