There is painting of Velasquez' princess in the last room of the Rene Cushman Gallery in Springerville, AZ. It is beautiful, but it was not done by the master himself. It was done by a student. Early in the 20th century it was considered the duty of an art student to copy the masters and those who wished to sponsor the arts bought those copies. There was no intent to defraud. We don't know if Ms Cushman bought the painting to support the arts or simply because it was a piece of beauty to enjoy. She had a beautiful collection. Well worth the stop in Springerville.
Times have changed. Students still make copies of the masters, but the "intellectual property right" laws make it next to impossible to sell the copies.
When I worked as a graphic designer I learned to be very leery of copying anything. The case law is not in favor of the designer and the statute was confusing and ever changing. Now I'm again a student and as long as no money changes hands I can copy to my hearts content, yet something nags at me. Right now I'm trying to decide how to turn my "bog standard" teapot into Alice in Wonderland without stealing someone else's work. The original illustrations are probably fair game. At one point art became public domain 50 years after the artist died. Maybe that still holds. The newer versions are Disney and they don't fool around. They are reported to have spies actively seeking those who sell their images. I have no intent to sell, but I want to honor the artists who have preceded me. Is copying their work honoring or dishonoring them? I could do an homage to the original artist. I could do something influenced by Beatrice Potter or Bessie Guttman. All acceptable possibilities.
So now I sit dithering. The teapot is the perfect dryness to carve or do I paint my own Alice? Worse how can I make a Mad Hatter that is uniquely mine? We need to get back to the studio soon. I need deadlines to shorten my dither time.