PDA

View Full Version : Is this a copyright violation


Boop Enjoyment
08-04-2005, 03:48 AM
The other evening, I was visiting the website for Lynnell and Hailey (http://www.thelchain.com) (two personalities on NBC's Starting Over) (http://www.startingovertv.com) They can be located under "Where are they now?" (http://www.startingovertv.com/wherearethey/index.html)
The concern is on the page for "Hailey's Art", (http://www.thelchain.com/hailey.html) there is a painting of what appears to be Betty Boop holding a surfboard. There is a large signature on the painting as "Hailey B"
The odd part is Betty Boop is showcased by King Features, a unit of The Hearst Corporation. Some of the Hearst stations air NBC's Starting Over.
Is it possible Hailey received permission to freely distribute the image of Betty Boop on the internet as a painting, without any recognition to the original idea? According to the FAQ section of BettyBoop.com, it reads: "Without authorization, it is illegal to sell or distribute any product using Betty Boop images from the the forums, the official BB site, fan sites, licensee sites, scanned images and your own drawings of BB." I interpret the internet as a method to distribute, and I don't believe Hailey is a licensee or manufacturer.
I realize there are people across the internet copying images, artwork, and media and distributing it on their own free will. But in this case where you have a reality tv personality create a website and place a painting on the site without recognition to original author, seems a litte out of the ordinary. If the creators of the Hailey B. painting were to argue, they had made some variations to the painting to make it appear different from Betty Boop in an attempt to bypass the copyright procedure. I would have to disagree, since the first thing I thought when I saw the painting was it looked like Betty Boop.
This appears to be a similar thing Vanilla Ice did when he ripped David Bowie's song, thinkig no one would notice.
It is just a shame to see people's ideas stolen in such a manner.

In case the link for the artwork in question did not appear, it is: http://www.thelchain.com/hailey.html

The Moocher
08-08-2005, 09:42 AM
It's an exceptionally poor drawing (IMHO) and I don't see why anyone would pay money for it.

I'm not a lawyer, nor am I an employee of the Hearst Organization or King Features, so I can't comment on the legal issues. However, it seems incredible to me that Hearst or King would give anyone blanket permission to draw Betty Boop-like images and distribute them over the Net.

Possibly Mgchan or PRBoop will comment on this one.

Mooch

bboop480
08-08-2005, 02:46 PM
I Agree With Moocher...its Not A Very Good One!

bettyboopfan
08-11-2005, 01:26 AM
Not a good one at all!!!

someone200
04-18-2007, 09:44 AM
that is a really poor drawing of Betty :( are those actually for sale?

someone200
05-02-2007, 06:17 PM
this one isn't so bad.. it looks like it had effort in it

Bikerbettyboop
05-09-2007, 01:30 PM
My understanding is that you can create BB images for your own personal use but not for resale. It has to be officially licensed before it can be offered for sale.

singlerose
05-20-2007, 02:02 PM
For one, the painting is just wrong. No one seems able to copy the original at all. For two, I agree I don't think the rights to copy and sell this painting would have been approved.

Bikerbettyboop
05-23-2007, 06:31 PM
Only Hearst can tell us for sure.