# copyright laws for Vintage transfer



## mrdavid (Sep 14, 2007)

Ok need some help I am starting to sell Vintage plastisols that do have there copyright on them I would like to Know is it legal for me to sell them ?


----------



## badalou (Mar 19, 2006)

mrdavid said:


> Ok need some help I am starting to sell Vintage plastisols that do have there copyright on them I would like to Know is it legal for me to sell them ?


Copyright goes back 70 years. Anything before 1930 is ok unless family renewed it. so answer is as I stated in email to you is yes. You are opening yourself up to be sued are at least get letter, nasty letter.


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

This depends on when the copyright was applied for. They have to be renewed. I don't recall the exact number of years that must elapse before a copyrighted image becomes public domain, but I believe any image not copyrighted must have been in existance for 50 years. I'm talking off the top of my head without doing the research, but there must be some place where you can do a copyright search. If you are doing something like Coca Cola, be careful. I know they maintain their copyrights. If it is some defunct company, you may be safer, but do your research to be sure that the copyrights haven't been renewed. If the image is copyrighted, you may still be able to deal with the entity holding the copyright to obtain a use license for the image for some negotiated fee.


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

I just realized that if you check on the copyright link in the post, it covers all the questions you were asking.


----------



## mrdavid (Sep 14, 2007)

Now I was told that as long as the coptrights are on them they would be all right to sell.
And if you copy them then they could come after you! There not copy's I do have the names of the companys that made them and they are no longer around


----------



## sunnydayz (Jun 22, 2007)

You may need to be able to prove you have legal license to sell them. The problem is that the company you say made them is not around, so you have no proof that company made those particular transfers and that they did it legally.


----------



## badalou (Mar 19, 2006)

mrdavid said:


> Now I was told that as long as the coptrights are on them they would be all right to sell.
> And if you copy them then they could come after you! There not copy's I do have the names of the companys that made them and they are no longer around


Copyright means you need to have permission to use it. Some companies let you buy the transfer as the end user. That means it stops there. You are not allowed to purchase bulk transfers and sell to others. that is what they do.. There is one company that I buy clip art from that sells car decals like ford and chevy but they can not sell to me only to authorized dealers. I made some shirts that had magazine covers on them from the 20's. I wanted to use others from the 30's and 40's but the law said no. If it was me.. which it is not, I would remove all questionalble stuff from your web. I am sure you can find other thing. Lou


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

I cannot think of a reason why it would violate the copyright to sell the transfers. You are selling the original transfers, not making copies correct? This is no different than selling a record album, painting, CD, DVD or book that you bought from one person and are reselling to another. If you copy the item then you violate the copyright but reselling the original product is perfectly legal. The original license would have covered the right to reproduce the image for resell, once you buy it you can press it or resell it. I wouldn't hesitate to sell them.


----------



## mrdavid (Sep 14, 2007)

they are not copy's and I have the paper work and the names of the companys that made them


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

If you are selling originals for the intent they were made for, I see no problem, as long as the company that sold them to you made them legally and you can prove you bought them. If you buy an original artwork, for example, you have the right to resell that property, but not necessarily the right to copy it.


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

After thinking about it some more my original analogy may or may not be correct since I was thinking about it from the standpoint of the transfer being on a shirt, but I'm still of the opinion that you can resell them legally. At worst these should be considered grey market items and there seem to be no shortage of people selling them. Personally I would take a bunch to the local flea market, set up a booth and sell them on shirts.


----------



## AustinJeff (May 12, 2007)

badalou said:


> Some companies let you buy the transfer as the end user. That means it stops there. You are not allowed to purchase bulk transfers and sell to others.


Right. But I believe the key element here is that this is not part of the copyright, it is part of the terms of sale. It's possible that the original purchaser violated the terms of sale, but I would think that MrDavid here would be protected by the First-Sale Doctrine, which says that "a copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy end once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made."


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

AustinJeff said:


> Right. But I believe the key element here is that this is not part of the copyright, it is part of the terms of sale. It's possible that the original purchaser violated the terms of sale, but I would think that MrDavid here would be protected by the First-Sale Doctrine, which says that "a copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy end once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made."


 
I concur Jeff. In this instance, the transfers are being used for their intended purpose with no intent of infringement of the copyright holder's rights.


----------



## Girlzndollz (Oct 3, 2007)

Copyright is to ensure the owner of the art work is compensated for their art on these transfers, and copyright gives the owner of the art a leg to stand on to make sure that others aren't stealing their art - and making money - and bypassing the creator of the art. 

When the art was originally produced onto these transfers, and the transfers were sold the first time, the owner of the copyright was paid their royalties. 

This brings up a question. There is someone in our tsf classifieds selling a bunch of transfers they had bought from ProWorld. I am sure all those transfers have the little copyright symbol. At this time, the person wants to sell off their stock of older designs and update their site. All of his transfers were bought from a company, just like David's, they are first hand legit transfers. Now since the person wants to sell off his stock, and if I was to buy the stock in that classified ad, wouldn't that be the same difference as David's stock? David's stock and my stock would both be bought from the person who bought them first hand? 

Neither stock is bootlegged.  <seriously


----------



## badalou (Mar 19, 2006)

You guys need to re think it. Copyright mean that the person who owns the copyrights allows the purchaser to use for own use not for commercial. Meaning David can use on shirt he wears. Not buy and make a commercial product which cheats the owner of the copyright. Unless they license you to sell commercially you are asking for trouble. I think you should read the copyright laws before you think you can get away with it. Then you are guilty of ignorance of the law. If I made a design and sold it I own the copyright I may allow a buyer to use it for their own use. Not place on commercial product and sell unless I license it for that purpose.


----------



## COEDS (Oct 4, 2006)

I'm in agreement with Lou. I would not take the chance, it looks like a good way to lose a house and your savings if you get sued.I'm not sure where you got these, but I had a situation with copyright infringement and it is no joke. ..... JB


----------



## Girlzndollz (Oct 3, 2007)

badalou said:


> You guys need to re think it. Copyright mean that the person who owns the copyrights allows the purchaser to use for own use not for commercial. Meaning David can use on shirt he wears.


I don't understand. Art Brands sells licensed stock transfers that are all copyrighted. The above post would mean that no stock transfers would be sold in bulk, only to be "for own use not for commerical". 

That would mean not for sale to people who apply transfers to shirts and re-sell them, that the copyright holder is only selling them to "purchase to use for own use not for commericial. Meaning David can use on shirt he wears". For some reason, this doesn't make any sense to me. 



> Not buy and make a commercial product which cheats the owner of the copyright.


Art Brands carries licensed stuff that is copyrighted. How is the copyright owner cheated when Art Brands sells me 40 transfers? What if I go out of business and I want to sell my equipment along with my stock. The copyright owner was paid the first time when I bought the transfers from Art Brands. Correct? Then I will try to recoup my money and convert inventory to cash by selling my stock, how is that hurting the copyright owner. Again, they already were paid when I purchased, so I don't understand what is the issue. Transfers for tee shirts are intended to be distributed on shirts, how can the copyright owner be expected to control every tee shirt sale made with their image on it? Other than making sure their art is sold through a licensed dealer like Art Brands, who probably paid heavily for the license to sell the art work, from there, it is up to Art Brands to distribute the image, try to make money off their investment by selling to us, and then up to us to find the customers to try to convert our investment into sales and profit. 



> Unless they license you to sell commercially you are asking for trouble.


This is the part that Art Brands does for us, and then has the luxury of selling the images at a premium price to us bc of their investment into the licenses? I was under the impression the license they have to sell the images is why we buy from them in the first place. Instead of going to the net, doing a "save picture as" and printing it off our inkjet printers... no?



> I think you should read the copyright laws before you think you can get away with it.


I don't think anyone is trying to get away with it. I think that's is why the question was asked in the first place. To be sure it is okay. 



> If I made a design and sold it I own the copyright I may allow a buyer to use it for their own use. Not place on commercial product and sell unless I license it for that purpose.


The transfers in question were purchased in the same manner one would buy licensed products from Art Brands or Bang on. They are someone's inventory that was cleared out.

If I am missing something really big here, please explain it to me. I do not understand why licensed stock transfers are illegal to use. I thought this is why folks pay more for licensed artwork and logos, like Coca cola, Levis, bands. It costs more, but they are easier to sell bc they are well known, compared to generic stock transfers, so I am very confused what could be a problem, as all stock transfers are copyrighted images. 


JB, you are in this thread, recommending where to get licensed transfers:
http://www.t-shirtforums.com/heat-press-heat-transfers/t13637.html#post87601. These transfers David has are licensed trasnfers, what makes them different from what folks are asking for in this thread? Maybe that is the part I don't understand the most. I thought ALL stock transfers are copyrighted.

Seriously, stillllll >>> 

..... or maybe... I'm not...


----------



## mrdavid (Sep 14, 2007)

Here it is in black and white.

*First-sale doctrine*

*From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia*

• _Learn more about citing Wikipedia_ •​

Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the first-sale doctrine as applied to copyright. For the analogous first-sale doctrine applicable to patents, see First-sale doctrine (patent).
The *first-sale doctrine* is a limitation on copyright that was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1908 and subsequently codified in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109. The doctrine allows the purchaser to transfer (_i.e.,_ sell or give away) a particular lawfully made copy of the copyrighted work without permission once it has been obtained. That means that a copyright holder's rights to control the change of ownership of a particular copy end once that copy is sold, as long as no additional copies are made. This doctrine is also referred to as the "first sale rule" or "exhaustion rule".


----------



## Comin'OutSwingin (Oct 28, 2005)

mrdavid said:


> Ok need some help I am starting to sell Vintage plastisols that do have there copyright on them I would like to Know is it legal for me to sell them ?


My opinion would be yes, that's it's legal for you to sell them.

I can't see any reason that it would be illegal, mainly for all the reasons that Kelly has stated. I think she has a better grasp of it than she thinks.

David, if you've got your paperwork, I wouldn't worry too much about it.


----------



## AustinJeff (May 12, 2007)

badalou said:


> I think you should read the copyright laws before you think you can get away with it. Then you are guilty of ignorance of the law.


Lou, I'm pretty sure I'm not ignorant of the law. I am specifically referring to Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109, commonly referred to as the first-sale doctrine. What is your interpretation of how section (a) applies to this specific situation?

It states: "(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(3) [17 USCS Sect. 106(3)], the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title [17 USCS Sects. 101 et seq.], or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord."

Some people might think it ought to work differently, but the way it actually works seems pretty clear to me (at least in this case.)


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

From what I'm reading, these transfers were made in bulk and obviously made for resale. The copyright was on them to prevent reproduction. The redistribution of the original materials should not constitute a breach of copyright law as they are not being used for anything other than their original intended purpose. IMHO


----------



## badalou (Mar 19, 2006)

AustinJeff said:


> Lou, I'm pretty sure I'm not ignorant of the law. I am specifically referring to Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 109, commonly referred to as the first-sale doctrine. What is your interpretation of how section (a) applies to this specific situation?
> 
> It states: "(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(3) [17 USCS Sect. 106(3)], the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title [17 USCS Sects. 101 et seq.], or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord."
> 
> Some people might think it ought to work differently, but the way it actually works seems pretty clear to me (at least in this case.)


That is a legal term not you in general. My son is a lawyer and told me when one breaks the law and says he did not know that he broke the law then he is considered ignorent of the law which in fact makes him guilty. Like if i go and steal a car and get cought then say i did not know it was a crime... Like a nice Ford escape hibred...


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

There is also such a thing as due diligence. If you suspect that something is wrong, you can use normal means to discover whether it is wrong or not. I don't think it applies in this instance unless there was some unusual contract with the manufacturers forbiding the sale or reuse of the transfers.


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

Here is a snippet of a case involving baseball cards:

_Footnote: 11_ _ Appellants' argument that Vintage acted tortiously because appellants' licensing arrangements do not authorize Vintage (or any other third party) to market or appropriate their likenesses lacks merit in light of our conclusion that the first-sale doctrine applies to the right of publicity. Because the first-sale doctrine limits appellants' rights in controlling the use of their likenesses, *Vintage (or any other third party) lawfully could sell or transfer the tangible property containing appellants' licensed images without separately entering a licensing agreement with appellants.
*_Allison v. Vintage Sports Plaques


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

badalou said:


> My son is a lawyer and told me when one breaks the law and says he did not know that he broke the law then he is considered ignorent of the law which in fact makes him guilty.


Traditionally it is said, _*Ignorantia juris non excusat*_ - Ignorance of the law is no excuse.


----------



## Phantom (May 1, 2008)

Rick, they aren't reproducing or using the transfers for other than their intended use. An example would be a postage stamp. You can purchase it, and sell or give it to another person to put on an envelope. It doesn't give anyone the right to reproduce it or use the image likeness for advertising or other type of gain.


----------



## plan b (Feb 21, 2007)

Man ,,when in doub't consult a lawyer in that field, it would be a cheap price to pay considering what could happen.


----------



## LLevine (Feb 7, 2007)

When you purchase an image from Artbrands llc it is licensed officially. We contract with over 400 different artists licensors brands etc. it is expensive cumbersome but worth it. Your advantage is that you are safe ordering from us. 

I have been involved in this crazy industry for almost all of my life. I am fifty years old but I have 200 years of experience believe me. When in doubt ask someone if it is licensed. It is very difficult to get a license especially for transfers for many reasons. Artbrands understands the complexities of this. 

I know it is confusing so my suggestion is to get a hold of a good copyright or intellectual property attorney. Better consult with them now so that you won't need him or her later. 


Take care. 


Larry Levine

President

Artbrands llc


----------



## badalou (Mar 19, 2006)

here is something that we all should read. It actually deal with items sold on ebay, which are not much different then those sold on our websites. I think it covers a lot and not only marvel but other companies as well.
*Frequently Asked Questions*


*Q:* Why was my auction suspended? 
*A:* If your auction was terminated in response to a request from Marvel, it means that the item you were selling or the listing itself infringed a right owned by Marvel. Some of the factors that help to identify infringing merchandise are described below. 
*Q:* Is there an easy way to identify infringing Marvel products? 
*A:* Sometimes a seller will use terms like “bootleg,” “custom” “copy” or “can’t guarantee authenticity.” The unauthorized Marvel products most frequently sold on eBay include craft or home-made items (including artwork), unauthorized reprints of artwork featuring Marvel characters, copies of comic books collected on CD-ROM, pirated or bootleg videos, VCDs and DVDs, and counterfeit or knockoff licensed products such as statues, apparel, toys and bags. 
*Q:* Why hasn’t Marvel suspended all auctions selling infringing products? 
*A:* Marvel vigorously enforces its rights. It is possible that some infringing auctions escape Marvel’s attention. The fact that others may be selling products that infringe Marvel’s rights does not give others the right to do so nor does it prevent Marvel from ending those auctions about which it does become aware. If you want to report an infringing listing that has not been suspended, please send the information along with the seller’s name and the eBay item number to [email protected]. 
*Q:* Why does Marvel care about small sellers on eBay? 
*A:* Marvel works hard to preserve the integrity of its name and its copyrights, trademarks and logos. Characters first created more than forty years ago continue to enjoy widespread popularity because of the quality control that Marvel has exercised to govern the use of its copyrights and trademarks. The auction of infringing merchandise, which is often not of the same quality required of a Marvel product, damages Marvel’s reputation and leads to complaints from consumers and internet users about this poor quality. Consumers may attribute to Marvel the inferior quality of unauthorized products purchased over eBay. Marvel must be vigilant in protecting the goodwill associated with the Marvel name and copyrights and will take action to insure that online auctions of counterfeit goods are ended. 
*Q:* I reported an infringement. Can you tell me what happened? 
*A:* Marvel investigates thousands of reported infringements each year. The results of those investigations are confidential and Marvel does not report back to third parties concerning the actions taken in response to reported infringements. 
*Q:* Why can’t I sell craft items that use Marvel characters? 
*A:* While the creation of craft items using Marvel copyrights is infringing, Marvel does not generally dispute craft items made by fans for their personal use. Where, however, those items are listed for sale on eBay, the user is seeking a commercial benefit from his or her infringing conduct. For more information on copyrights see eBay - Page Not Found. 
*Q:* Are there particular types of problem crafts? 
*A:* There are particular types of product for which Marvel receives more complaints and which, on investigation, are often fake. These include original artwork, address labels, light switch covers and statues. 
*Q:* What if I use artwork that is in the public domain? 
*A:* Marvel art and characters are not in the public domain. Some operate under the mistaken belief that, if they can download an image from the Internet, that the image is “public domain.” This is not true. Public domain exists either because the copyright term has elapsed or because the copyright owner has not elected to assert copyright ownership. Neither is true with respect to Marvel art and characters. 
*Q:* Why did eBay allow me to post my auction if it is against the law? 
*A:* eBay does not generally pre-screen auctions and does not verify that sellers have the right to sell the listed item. 
*Q:* I thought the item was authentic. Why can’t I resell it on eBay? 
*A:* Infringing product is illegal and can cause harm to Marvel, as owner of the intellectual property, and to consumers who are deceived. Both are victims, even when the seller “didn’t know.” Knowledge is not required for a seller to be liable for damages under either the Trademark Act or the Copyright Act. 
*Q:* Can I list an item if I expressly say that it is “NOT GENUINE”, “HOMEMADE”, “NOT AUTHENTIC” or “PIRATE”? 
*A:* No. You are still selling unlicensed and unauthorized merchandise. A disclaimer regarding the authenticity of the goods, such as “fake,” “cannot guarantee authenticity” and similar disclaimers does not satisfy the laws prohibiting the sale of infringing merchandise. 
*Q:* Can I use Marvel trademarks, artwork or characters to make my listing more appealing? 
*A:* No. The use of trademarks, logos, trade names, artwork or character likenesses owned by others, including Marvel, may wrongly imply that your listing is authorized, sponsored or approved by that third party and it may dilute the value of those intellectual property rights, in violation of both state and federal law. The use of trademarks as keywords to drive traffic to your listing may violate trademark laws as well as eBay’s own policies: eBay: Redirect. 
*Q:* Can I sell videos or DVDs? 
*A:* If the video or DVD is an authorized copy released for sale in the United States, then you can re-sell your used video or DVD. 
*Q:* Can I sell unauthorized copies of videos or DVDs? 
*A:* No. You cannot sell an unauthorized copy of a video or DVD. 
*Q:* I downloaded a movie or television show from the Internet and burned my own VCD. Can I sell this VCD on eBay? 
*A:* No. Marvel does not authorize distribution of its movies via the Internet and any such copying, distribution or sale of such material would be against the law. 
*Q:* What if I bought the copy at a flea market or via a web site? 
*A:* It does not matter where you got a bootleg movie, or whether you paid for it with your own money. If it is bootleg, it is illegal to sell. 
*Q:* Can I sell movie trailers? 
*A:* No. Items used to market motion pictures, like trailers, are distributed in commercial channels for use as promotional items by Marvel’s promotional partners. These items are not sold by Marvel, but are licensed to the promotional partner for limited use. The promotional partner is not permitted to sell or dispose of these items in any way in which they can then enter sales channels, like eBay. 
*Q:* What about screeners? 
*A:* The same rule applies to screeners, which are distributed for a limited purpose and are expressly not for resale. 
*Q:* What about promotional materials? 
*A:* Any promotional item that is not distributed in the consumer marketplace is subject to the same restrictions set forth above. 
*Q:* Can I sell copies of television shows, like old animated cartoons? 
*A:* No. Only original videos distributed by Marvel or its licensees for resale can be sold on eBay. Any copy of a television show, even if it was originally broadcast on an over-the-air network, is an infringing copy, and any listing offering such product may be suspended. 
*Q:* Can I sell weapons or costumes based off Marvel's characters? Even if I don't use the names? 
*A:* No. Weapons or costumes sharing any likenesses to Marvel's characters are infringing materials. 
*Q:* What if I didn’t realize I was violating the law or infringing Marvel’s rights? 
*A:* Innocent intent is not a defense under Federal or State trademark law, or under Federal copyright law. You have a responsibility to ensure that your actions do not violate someone else’s copyrights. Before auctioning any property you need to take affirmative steps to ensure that the item you are selling is authorized for resale by the copyright or trademark owner. For more information about Marvel and legitimate product incorporating Marvel artwork,


----------



## sunnydayz (Jun 22, 2007)

I think that is great information Lou has posted from ebay. I think the best thing to do in this instance is if you are in doublt talk to an attorney. Nobody here can give information that is 100% sure as we are not attorneys representing you. 

I have moved several posts out of this thread as they were getting personal and that is not what t-shirt forums is about. Please respect each other as you would like to be respected yourselves. I myself like to see everyone helping each other and I would like to think that is one thing that sets this forum apart from others.


----------



## wormil (Jan 7, 2008)

It is worth noting that the FAQ are not ebay policies but are published by Marvel and were a response to Marvel requesting that ebay remove many counterfeit items that appeared in the wake of their movies, nothing in the Marvel's response indicates that they oppose the sale of genuine items and in fact, genuine Marvel items are still being sold on ebay.


----------



## sunnydayz (Jun 22, 2007)

I think the thing that would point me to is that I would want to make sure that the items I purchased were indeed authentic  That was what I was talking about it being good information..


----------



## Rodney (Nov 3, 2004)

This thread is closed. If you have legal questions, please contact an attorney. We can't give out legal advice in the forum.


----------

