I am using Star Wars figures in a photo project, are there any regluations about selling my work?

Question

I am photographing single and group images with Hasbro Star Wars figures.

Answer 1

Yes, they are subject to copyright and you may find yourself in trouble if you sell your work for profit.

Answer 2

What you are making is deritive art and from the way I understand it the situation is layered and you will have to deal with three issues:
- Copyrights on the Star Wars designs themselves (Lucas studio?)
- Trademark on the Star Wars imagery.
- Copyrights by Hasbro on their version of the Star Wars figures (which is derative art based on the SW designs themselves)

So you would normally have to get a release from two parties to do this. In theory also when you are not selling stuff by the way. Though you'll often find that they will not persue that.

Now, since the copyrights were set up to protect artists in such a way that it would not hinder all posibility to create further art you could check if your work would be considered fair use:
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

Answer 3

All you need to do is get a license from Hasbro and George Lucas and you can sell your photos to your hearts content.

Given the amount of trademarking that George Lucas did after he released the first film, I'm not sure you can even say, "Star Wars," without own Lucas some kind of royalty.

It's called trademark infringement, and it's a great way to get sued and lose a lot of money.

Answer 4

You really cant make an umbrella statement and say that there is no way that you can use a copyright item in a photo or piece of art because it is done and has been done. Of course you are walking a really thin line when you do this, and even if you are in the right, you can be dragged into court to prove that your work is not violating copyright law.
This is just one of many examples but I am sure you are familiar with the work of the artist Andy Warhol who frequently used pop culture items in his work without seeking the permission of the company who held the copyright for the article he was using in his art, take for example his Campbell soup can series. Now granted this was done before the copyright revisions of 1976, but even with the revisions there are instances when you can in fact use a copyright image in your art. The loophole is called Fair Use, and it has been cited by many artists who use copyright imagery in their art. Of course this does not prevent companies challenging your interpretation of fair use in court. Below is an excerpt from US Copyright law defining what fair use is.
In federal copyright law 17 U.S.C. §§101 et seq., refers to specific use of copyrighted materials without payment of royalties or which otherwise does not constitute an infringement of copyright; permitted use by copying and acknowledgment; refers to a "privilege in others than the owner of a copyright to use the copyrighted material in a reasonable manner without his consent, notwithstanding the monopoly granted to the owner [by the copyright]." 366 F. 2d 303, 306. Whether a use is considered a fair use depends upon the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use upon the market value of the copyright. Important factors include whether the copied material was creative or research-oriented; the status of the user (reviewer, scholar, compiler, parodist); extent of use (both qualitatively and quantitatively); the absence of an intent to plagiarize as evidenced by proper acknowledgment; the original contribution of the user. See Kaplan & Brown, Copyright 309-351 (4th ed. 1985).