Heh, good fontageI can't help much. Could only tell you a bit about Dutch law
/edit: It's not a Rembrandt, is it?
mediocre ha ha ha, you're reading this,
Mon 11 May 2009, 20:52,
archived)
Nah, it's that Spitfire from yesterday.The guy's site is a little, well, forceful in stating what he does to copyright infringers...
(
Colonel Boris "...a desperate Buzzfeed imitation...",
Mon 11 May 2009, 20:54,
archived)
I'd say it's a new creative effortYou're only using the photo as reference material, not copying it to use in a commercial way, right?
mediocre ha ha ha, you're reading this,
Mon 11 May 2009, 20:58,
archived)
From what I understand of UK copyright law,copyright is created as soon as something is in a physical form. In this case the paintings.
The copyright holder then has the right to stop people copying or adapting the work without their consent. They also have moral rights, which prevent the work being used in a defamatory way.
You would, technically, be breaking copyright by creating a derivative work (your painting) without asking permission. Although as long as you are not making money off it then I can't imagine why anyone would take action against you.
EDIT: Copyright lasts for 70 years after the creator's death as well...
(,
Mon 11 May 2009, 21:40,
archived)
The copyright holder then has the right to stop people copying or adapting the work without their consent. They also have moral rights, which prevent the work being used in a defamatory way.
You would, technically, be breaking copyright by creating a derivative work (your painting) without asking permission. Although as long as you are not making money off it then I can't imagine why anyone would take action against you.
EDIT: Copyright lasts for 70 years after the creator's death as well...