The painter five painting is considered copying pictures

Artists YanYaYa created a great number of local residents in pamirs plateau the subject of oil painting, the painting was part with a case of infringement, was a photographer XueHuaKe prosecution. July 10,, Beijing chaoyang first-instance court that, YanYaYa involved five of seven paintings of infringement.

Photographer XueHuaKe lawsuit in 2005, said he met with YanYaYa, yan had to appreciate to the works by asking for, he will some photography in developing a, books, and given YanYaYa. YanYaYa after the shooting in the pamirs without authorization of photographic work deduce for 7 painting and exhibit, publish, or auction, violated its emobodied.

XueHuaKe sued for YanYaYa stop infringing, make an apology, each painting according to the standard of 15000 yuan compensation for the economic losses, and ask the auction YanYaYa oil painting in two of the auction company take back the auction infringement has work and be destroyed.

In the trial, YanYaYa argue that XueHuaKe accusing it of the suspect 7 oil painting department completed independently created, do not constitute infringement. She says, when two people going with the pamirs, two people in the local meet, she will XueHuaKe to create the site, the characters after pose, in her paintings at the same time, the XueHuaKe taking pictures.

Both sides on current fails to submit the creation of the evidence. The court after comparison, YanYaYa's oil painting "Cartoon Japanese geisha oil painting", "cartoon dog red background oil painting", "A black of strong horse oil painting", "Makeup in the woman oil painting" and the "

Lake bridge landscape oil painting" respectively with the XueHuaKe corresponding photography works highly similar to exist, in addition to the nuances outside, both in the character of the main performance, expressions, gestures and clothing and other aspects, were the same, and XueHuaKe photography earlier published or foreign exhibition.

The court said that, YanYaYa involved in the activities to be not change works under the premise of basic content, photography works from the changes to the canvas work behavior, constitute the XueHuaKe photography works of adaptation. But YanYaYa adapted XueHuaKe photography, did not obtain permission from, and still will be adapted the canvas work after used for exhibition, publishing, also fails to pay the remuneration, so violated the XueHuaKe enjoy emobodied, should stop infringing, compensation for the loss of a legal responsibility. The case after the first sentence, YanYaYa refuses to appeal against the decision.