So if you go to Subway and a sandwich artist makes your sub and

Unless signed under contract, the photographer owns all rights to the photo.

>>8090973
It's a free use sandwich open to the public domain, but the picture is yours
It's like if you take a picture of a landmark
You don't own the landmark, they don't own the landmark, but they can't use your picture if you don't want them to

>>8090973
>sandwich artist

lol americans are so fat they think food is art

File: 1404665633466.gif (74KB, 278x340px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 278x340px

>artist

>>8091005
>>8091007
Sorry, OP's an idiot

He meant artisan

On second thought if most of them are liberal arts bachelors, maybe sandwich artist isn't so inadequate a term.

>>8091003
Why is a sandwich considered free use, but a photo of e.g. a painting or a sculpture would still be copyrighted by the original artist?

>>8091022
It wouldn't be.

>>8091022
The sandwich is free use because it's not copyrighted
In order for something to be copyrighted it has to be copyrighted

>>8091058
For decades, copyright law has said that copyright protection kicks in the moment the work is created.

>>8090995
>take photo
>Subway™ cup is in shot
>try to use the logo without permission
>get sued
Great job, anon.

>>8091022
Because you've already purchased the sandwich, dumbass.
If you purchase the painting you own the rights to it too.

>>8092304
>purchase a book
>don't have the copyrights to it

>purchase a movie
>don't have the copyrights to it

>purchase an album
>don't have the copyrights to it

>purchase a painting
>???

>>8090973

The sub is the piece of art which you have purchased from the etstablishment that exploits the sandwich artists. So you own the art and the picture.

ITS LEGAL TO FILM OR TAKE PHOTOS IN PUBLIC. SECURITY CAMERAS ARE DOING IT ALL THE TIME YOU FUCKING IDIOT.

>>8092314

But who wants a copy of a painting?

>>8092314
you own the book, not the story

you own that copy of the movie not the rights pf distribution

you own the album not the distribution rights of the music

you own the sub but not the recipe

>>8093808
The same people who'd want a copy of a movie, or a copy of a book, or a copy of an album?

>>8093812
you can own the story in ur heart

>>8093800
>He doesn't realized there are separate laws for nobles and peasants.

>>8093800
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzysxHGZCAU

>>8091005
Why is there an anti-america shill in every fucking thread on /ck/?

File: spaghet!.png (138KB, 339x319px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 339x319px

>mfw this thread can't keep the idea of trademarks and copyrights straight

What is that weird taste that every cold cut sandwich has at Subway? They all have the same smell too.

>>8093812
>but not the recipe
Recipes can't be copyrighted.

>>8094256
Semen

File: 20090617FreddysSub2.jpg (72KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 500x250px

>>8090973
Now THIS is a work of art.

>>8094478
not gonna lie this sandwich is giving me a chubby

>>8094226
Lots of folks with too much time on their hands.

I FIGURED IT OUT /CK/, the ONLY SANDWICH WORTH GETTING FROM SUBWAY

>9 Grain Honey Oat Bread
>Rotissere Chicken toasted
>Pepperjack Cheese
>Spinach, Sweet Peppers, and Red Onion
>Spicy Mustard
>Salt/Pepper/Oregano

It was 10/10 in terms of fast food

File: ooi.jpg (160KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 500x375px

>>8094486
Heres where I got it from.

>>8090973
you would only infringe copyright if you tried to make a copy of the sandwich, based on the photo, without the artist's permission

>>8094500
I've been digging the teriyaki chicken on honey oat, pepper jack, lettuce, tomato, onion, pickle, olives, and jalapenos, with a small amount of sweet onion sauce (I don't want soggy bread). Not too dissimilar to yours.

I also like their seafood and crab on occasion as a guilty pleasure, with lettuce, tomato, pickles and olives and a bit of extra mayo. Take 'er home and sprinkle it with some Old Bay seasoning.

>>8094557
You've already made an infringing work by taking the photograph

>>8090973
Eating at subway is like buying the Budding ham and bologna from the oscar meyer copycat. Would you do that? I don't think so.

>>8094500
>>8094570
I don't go often anymore - pretty much only when I'm given a gift card. But, I get either the Spicy Italian or the BLT. Used to get the Meatball during wintertime, but, when they switched from 3 larger MBs per 6" to 4 smaller ones, it seemed like the quality also went down. The texture of the MBs was off.

Anyway,
Spicy Italian: wheat (toasted when only meat is on), American cheese, cucumber, black olives, tomatoes, onions, lettuce, oil & vinegar, black pepper.

BLT: wheat (toasted when only bacon on), swiss cheese, lettuce, tomato, ONE stripe of mayo (usually have to do the motion of making one stripe for them to not fuck it up with more), black pepper. Occasionally, if I want it more salty and fatty, I'll get black olives, but that's usually only if I've been doing a bunch of work outside in the heat.

>>8094571
only is he uses it for commercial gain and represents the sandwich as his own.

tl;dr you're wrong

>>8094674
>commercial gain
Do you have a single minute of law learning in you? Because that means fuck all when it comes to copyright infringement.

>>8094767
in terms of photography it actually does matter.

I bet you think you can't take picture of people without asking them either.

>>8094774
Use of copyrighted material, commercial or otherwise, is protected by copyright law. You can't use for example long clips from the original Star Wars trilogy in a film without permission, regardless of if there's any money involved whatsoever.

>>8094570
Sweet onion is alright, I just really like how Rotissere tastes like it is actual meat

The sub is neither useful nor novel, so it's not protected by copyright.

>>8094405
35 U.S.C. 101
*IN AMERICA* you can't copyright the recipe, but given it's unique enough, you can attain a patent baring any other establishment from producing a commercially traded product using a recipe or manufacturing process meant to blatantly copy the patented item.
for example, subway could patent a sandwich made a very specific way with very specific ingredients in a very specific style, but the cant patent the production of 12 inch long

>>8094839
Right, patents aren't copyrights though.

>>8094844
exactly.


as for OP's question:
in this instance, 35 U.S.C. 101 could be used to prevent the reproduction of the sandwich commercially, but no legal action could be taken against someone using a picture of the sandwich in commercial material (ex: an image in a news article or a video made for profit).
if the picture were of a sandwich on a wrapper with the subway logo on it, the image could fall under 17 U.S.C. 106, but because the logo is present.(even still, you'd really have to fight to get anywhere with that)

>>8094813
Oh, is it a different kind of chicken? I thought all their chicken offerings were those same pale white cubes.

Guess I'll try it the next time I find myself at Subway. I have tried their new "real" Italian hero, and was rather unimpressed. It was like a slightly better version of the cold cut combo. I'm guessing the mortadella overpowered the rest of the sandwich. The other meats don't quite stand up to the weird seasoning of their cheap bologna.

>>8091005
HOURLY