Can you change a picture so different that it will not violate a copyright?

Question

Alright,

What if you took a picture of a celebrity, and changed that picture in a paint program. Manipulating it.
For example, you changed the eye features/shape/ took out the lips and placed different lips, changed eye color, modified the nose to be bigger, and put elf ears on the celebrity, even go as far as changing the celebrities's expression.
To a certain extent of making the celebrity not really look like the celebrity, if anything it would look like a caricature.
Will that violate that celebrity's copyright if she/she copyrighted their face???

Edit: And yes, I know this is, a general discussion of the subject matter of your question and not legal advice.

I wanted to know about the subject.

Answer 1

Altering a picture is creating what's called a "derivative work." The copyright owner (most likely the photographer) has rights not only to the original work, but also to derivative works.

If you take the picture, then you are entitled to alter it, generally speaking. If you are using someone else's picture, then you are likely not entitled to alter it.

As you imply, there may be other issues involved with using the likeliness of a celebrity. The law regarding the right to publicity is primarily a matter of state law. So you will have to look to the laws of your particular state for the answer.

More information on derivative works can be found in the links below.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html

http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivative/faq.cgi

A good introduction to the law involving the right to publicity can be found in the links below.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Publicity

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/privacy/publicity04.htm

Answer 2

First, a person cannot have a copyright on their face. Copyright applies only to original works, such as photographs, books, paintings, music, etc. If you took the picture in public, you own the copyright to the photo and are free to use it in any way you want. Celebrities may have some publicity rights, but their lives are generally so public that they have no control over how pictures of them are used, caricatured or otherwise.

If you did not take the photo, say you took it from a magazine, it is possible to change the image enough to make using the copyrighted photo a fair use. This is called a transformative use. Such uses are particularly considered fair use when they involve satire or commentary.

Answer 3

Copyright law mostly deals with copys that are direct mechanical replications.

A work that is based on originality of composition is not considered a "derivitive" work. For example, Tchaikovsky's "1812 Overture" is considered his composition even though it contains some easily recognizable melodies that were not his. A hand drawn sketch taken from a published map is not considered a derivative work, an example that is stated in the US copyright laws. If the imitation clearly does not damage the commercial value of the original work, then it is not considered a "copy" under the law.

Answer 4

If you take the picture, you own the copyright. The celebrity may sue you for invasion of privacy, but you own the copyright.

** Note: This is a general discussion of the subject matter of your question and not legal advice. Local laws or your particular situation may change the general rules. For a specific answer to your question you should consult legal counsel with whom you can discuss all the facts of your case. **

Answer 5

It's illegal to create a derivative work of something you don't hold a copyright to. So, no, you can't legally do that.

*Dang it ron_mexi, you beat me.*