I personally would agree with what TFL said. I 
think that the images of the cels do belong to 
the animation studio rather then the current cel 
owner. The studio created the cel and therefore 
have all the copyright rights to it. In the same 
way if you buy a music CD the actual music on 
the CD is still copyrighted to the recording 
studio/artists (although this actualy brings up 
an interesting point: since you can 
legally "back up" a music CD for your personal 
back up use, could you "back up", ie make an 
identical copy, of a cel you own on the same 
grounds). Or in the same way if you own a 
paiting you do not own any copyright with regard 
to what is on the painting, ie you cannot start 
churing out posters of the painting without 
consent of the artist.

I think the anwser to the argument is in the 
fine line between the physical (the actual cel, 
which the current cel owner probably has some 
sort of copyright to) and the metaphysical (what 
is painted on the cel, to which the studio has 
all the copyrights to). When you take a scan of 
the cel you encapture on the the metaphysical, 
not the physical, hence you are scanning only 
the part which the studio created and owns. So 
while the scan itself is most likely a violation 
of the studio copyright, a fancel of your cel is 
most likely a violation of your copright over 
the cel.

Anyway my position in this is as it always has 
been, namely I dont belive in "image theft" and 
I do not think you own the image just because 
you own the cel. However I take this position 
form a personal view, rather then sound legal 
argument. I just think that arguing that 
someone "stole your image" is like acusing 
someone of stealing when they look upon your cel.

Otaku Inc.