Slashdot Mirror
Copying Graphics - What is Fair Use?
it0 asks: "I'm writing a web application and since I can't create good graphics, I'll be ripping them from other places on the web. The decent thing to do would be to ask permission, and at least specify where you got the graphic, however I don't see this happening much on other websites. Here's an example: I copied a trashcan icon that seems to be used by everyone and nobody seems to specify its original source. What about wallpapers? I've see a lot of models without references? I've also seen a lot of images that imitate the Windows GUI, and I've yet to notice anyone getting sued! For those interested, here is more information on the subject."
Well, yeah. Obviously, as you note, ripping some other site's rainbow horizontal line gif or animated pen-writing-on-paper-turns-into-an-envelope is routine, and hardly the same thing as setting up a porn site of copyrighted images served off somone else's server.
But it would be decent to ask, and you may want to really be a good guy and stick to downloading stock images off sites that explicitly give permission. (It's not like there's a shortage of rainbow horizontal line gifs.)
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
We all remember when Apple patented the trash can, right?
;)
Yet another "throw away" patent, if you ask me.
Fair use is when you have the permission of the author (or copyright holder, if they are not one and the same).
...
Period.
(Given that it sounds like you want to rip images off wholesale, and not create some sort of derivative work)
Perhaps the copyright holder placed the image into the public domain, or licenses it under something like the GPL; you need to find this out in order to use it, you cannot just assume that it is yours to have.
Because it looks free, does not make it so. Because you want it to be free, does not make it so. Just because everyone does it, does not make it right. Your mother should have taught you that; what might make you think that because it is the internet, that no longer applies? Because you don't think that you will get caught?
Geez, I even know that you know better, cause you said "The decent thing to do would be to ask permission..."
Perhaps you should qualify your question, like:
"I am too damn lazy to ask permission to use someone else's work; How obvious a theft of someone else's work do you think I can get away with?"
I really cannot believe this question; this whole article reads like a troll to me
I took a couple of web publishing classes in highschool, where we were required to make all our own graphics or prove that the image we used was in the public domain.
Although I normally make all my own graphics, in the rara occassion that I do use one from someone elses site, I first try to email them and check if it's ok. I then compile a list of any sites I don't get responses from and make sure to list them in a section of a links page with a little thanks and a note saying what graphic I used.
Also make sure that you don't link to the graphic on the persons page, not only is this stealing their bandwidth, but if something happens and the page is gone then you are without your graphic.
--"If I put in my two cents, and it's a penny for my thoughts, do I get change back?" --unknown
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
I've yet to notice anyone getting sued!
Out of curiosity...how did you expect to notice? Cease and desist letters are sent out on a daily basis in any country's legal system. Lawsuits about copyright infringement happen regularly.
Copy the graphics you need, if they send you a cease and desist or otherwise contact you, take it down immediately and apologize.
If you think nobody does this, you're nuts.
What do you mean nobody knows the original source? That's the trashcan icon from Mac OS 8+.
Ripping off icons from major OS' is a bad idea. Pleading ignorance to an obvious source doesn't help in the slightest.
In Australia, it's normally not a copyright violation if you take some 'artwork' and modify it by at least 10%. HOWEVER, that does not ever apply to trademarked images.
</IANAL>
Quite frankly, though, most artists will still consider that it's still theft of a kind. If you're making money from your application, then you should invest some of it and employ some talented kid who needs money for rent or food or something. You don't really need that new P4 rig yet anyway, do you?
So, for now:
1) If you're building the application, build it so that the artwork can be EASILY slotted in later. (seems obvious, but really design to support a complete facelift. You know about MVC, right?)
2) Maybe browse the web for portfolios, and resumes of people with cool websites and no jobs. Exploit them for low wages and the ability to but real work on their resumes.
3) Or, release the app with crappy graphics and a HOWTO and wait for your users to build you a nice pretty interface.
/* affect != effect */ void affect(int *thing,int effect) { *thing += effect; }
Not only that, but they may put in a pic of the goatse.cx guy in place of the one you linked to.
Man, this post is so totally wrong, and convinced that it is so totally right, that you ended up in my enemies bin immediately. That doesn't happen much, but, for god's sake don't sound so completely sure of yourself if you've never actually read the copyright title or even (apparently) a FAQ about it.
Fair use is real, and in fact, it has its own Section in the US Code . Sometimes it is legal to copy a work without permission. It's possible that some uses of copied web graphics could be fair use, but unlikely--most wholesale copying fails one of the four factors (see 17 usc 107).
On the other hand, it's possible that some copying could be ok, since not everything qualifies for copyright. If the work is not sufficiently expressive (like a scrollbar widget, perhaps) then you could very well be in the clear. However, the "look and feel" of a program or OS can be protected by copyright (sadly), meaning that if you copy enough of those uncopyrightable widgets, you could also be in trouble.
Anyway, the best thing to do, as you say, is get permission. I'll bet the GNOME and KDE icons are Free (as in software), so you could probably use those safely, assuming you're doing the right thing and making your app free!
Actually I used to be worse than that, I used to link to the actual image I wanted to use rather than do the considerably more decent thing which would be to download it and host it on my own server.
I got my comeuppance one day when someone pointed out that a prominent image on my home page had been replaced with an image of somebody's middle finger which superimposed text reading:
Suffice to say I host all my own images now.There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
If you rip off my graphics.... then can I rip off your code? after all, it's the same thing, they're both just bits...
Why not hook up with an art student who would design the graphics in exchange for a screen credit? or contact schools, as a teacher could use your app as a class project.
Well if you knew anything about macs you'd know that the trash icons he is referring to are the trash icons used in System 7 through to Mac OS 9.
Amazing most of these responses are so respectful of the copyrights to the image, while the typical slashdot posting on an RIAA post keeps discussing how important it is to be able to get music for free.
If you're after icons then you can find them from any number of themes for Gnome and KDE, with clear and standard licences.
Before you get to the question of what constitutes "fair use," the first step in the copyright law analysis is whether the work that was copied is sufficiently original, in other words a work of authorship, otherwise there is no copyright protection. While copying artwork willy-nilly from the Internet is usually an invitation to be sued, copying a drawing of a mere wastebasket might not be. The trivial case would be copying a drawing of a square or a circle. Neither is copyrightable subject matter. But elaborate on the circle by adding two more circles for ears and a couple of three-fingered hands, and you have Mickey Mouse (or Chuck E. Cheese, I forget which).
I've used the crystal theme KDE icons all over the web app we're working on (and apparently we employed the icon designer to do other stuff for us, but I don't know what he did).
.02
;-)
:)
Many Open Source apps have large image libraries that you can freely use. Just use Kuickshow to find the relevant directory.
cLive
ps - apologies if you're not using Linux - I'm not sorry that you can't access these, I'm just sorry you don't use Linux (to paraphrase Bill Hicks
--
Trinity in high heels carrying a whip:
The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
It's touchy when you're poking around in the area of using other people's stuff. Even if you do qualify for "fair use," someone can still accuse you and wreak major havoc on whatever you're trying to create. My suggestion (that is, if hiring a graphic artist is out of the question): Get the Gimp (OSS OS's or Windows ), learn to use the Bezier select tool (try TigerT's tutorial on how to make a 3D box), and whip together some quick icons. Then, if your project (which I'm assuming is independent, if you don't have a graphic artist) catches on and makes some money or something, the icons can be replaced later. You won't have to hassle with fair use at all.
I recognize people by their sigs. Is that a bad thing?
Take for instance speeding. People break the speed limit all the time, because they're not likely to get caught, and the penalties are low if they do get caught.
Likewise with most copyright infringement. Your chances of getting caught are very small. Even if you do get caught, you have fair use defenses, and even if you lose, you don't lose all that much. If you can show the judge that you were not aware that you were committing copyright infringement, the court can lower damages to only $200.
Now once you get a cease and desist order, things change. You're going to be considered a willful infringer, and now you're liable for up to $150,000 in statutory damages, and even criminal sanctions if your works amount to more than $1000 or you're distributing them for commercial gain.
As for fair use, fair use is whatever the supreme court justices say it is. It's best not to rely on fair use once you've received a cease and desist, or if you're planning on profiting off copyright infringement. At least not without hiring a lawyer first.
AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS
By William Henry Gates III
February 3, 1976
An Open Letter to Hobbyists
To me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted. Will quality software be written for the hobby market?
Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000.
The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC (less than 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour.
Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?
Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is get back at MITS for some problem you may have had. MITS doesn't make money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is theft.
What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.
I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, #114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108. Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software.
Bill Gates
General Partner, Micro-Soft
"BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
m
testing out my trending skills
In the United States you can't. If you see it, it's copyrighted by ClearChannel and they will take your house away if the mood suits them. Heck, you looked at it so you already copied it onto your cache, right?
Also, as others have said, some GPL software has images (KDE/Gnome) which you could use freely by virtue of the license.
Your confusion is exactly what Lessig speaks about in almost every interview he does. Does a copyright holder actually care if you copy his work?
/ blog/
Check out his blog and you'll probably learn something interesting:
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig
My Advice:
In theory fair use does not apply to works which are a public performance which are not for satire or review. Your website certainly counts as a public performance, and thus it would a civil copyright viloation for you to use other people's work.
But I really can't see most of the author's of any web graphics actually caring if you use their work. In fact, most of them are probably overjoyed when someone uses their work. And in almost all cases, you'll receive a ceist and desist letter before the copyright holder even considers filing suit. So as long as you comply with any letters you receive, you're probably fine.
Even the RIAA sends out letters to almost all of those violating it's copyrights, and only prosecutes very few of the very big offenders.
I aslo have gotten hate mail back from the people who really did steal other people's work, and have seen cases where they simply forgot to cite the source once they had permission- easily fixed, that last one. The hate mail generally consists of, "who made it your business?" or extremely juvenile insults etc. Someone once threatened to sue me for harassment- that would be the one who stole the MIT paper. It's discouraged me from putting my own work on the web, to be honest, both my artwork AND my own research. I suppose i'll get over that. But in the meantime, i think that the appropriate thing for me to do is to always point out where i feel that there's serious copyright issues, as when what's obviously someone's signed artwork has been cropped to delete the sig and posted as a website element on another site.
Incidentally, i started doing this because an artist friend had exactly that happen to her artwork- the images of oil and acrylic paintings up for SALE on her site were copied and used. Cease and desist letters work, especially if you have evidence of copyright and cc the ISP, etc.
"I'd say 'Have a good time,' but arson is still illegal.
What of private pictures posted to photo galleries that individuals have taken. I recently put up on my webserver my photo collection for friends and family to view. I didn't password protect it due to the computer illiterate nature of my family. But I sure don't want this to be an open door for photo infringement. I mean if a photo I took ended up in National Geographic or something, I'd be mighty pissed if I wasn't consulted or didn't get my share. With the advent of digital photography, what prevents someone from trolling everyone's photo albums and submitting pictures to the press. How do you claim that the picture is yours, especially when the person who ripped you off could have ripped off all your pictures? There remains no authenticity or ownership especially if you have a generic tourist picture (postcard worthy). I guess this is where a digital rights management would help, but what stops you from taking a screenshot of that picture?
---- The geek shall inherit the Earth.
Don't post the highest resolution version of an image to your website. Then, if someone rips you off, you can produce a higher resolution version, but they won't be able to, that should pretty much prove you took the original (IANAL though).
There generally isn't a need to post images larger than a megapixel, if someone wants to make a print, you can email them the full sized version.
Please, for your own sake, if you cannot create the art yourself, find somebody. Taking art from other site is not only against the law (in most cases), but it's just plain lazy. What happens when someone recognizes the images? Will you be proud of the fact that someone else's stuff is on your site? Will you give the original artist credit?
This isn't like having an illegally obtained MP3 on your hard drive. Your web site will be out there for everyone to see! Take it from somebody who knows what it's like to be ridiculed for being lazy with his web site. Make your own stuff. You will be happier in the long run that your site is 100% yours. You can show it off with pride.
Wish I could, all I got is my stupid golf blog. I just used a standard template. You think I'm proud of it? No. I am not. But once I get my art made and my site totally re-done, then it'll be something I can use to pick up chicks!
Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
I believe that National Geographic is printed at 133 linescreen (or thereabouts). To put your image in their magazine, they would need at least a 266 dpi image at the size they wish to print it (say, 4 x 5 ins.). If you had some 4 x 5 ins. photos on your site at a screen viewable 72 dpi, National Geographic would be SOL unless they print your image at a smaller size (1.083 x 1.353 ins. to be exact) to get the desired resolution. So that's one way to protect your photos.
Another way is to use Photoshop to add a watermark to all your photos. That way if someone steals them, they will be imprinted and difficult to change. Even if they do manage to clone out the watermark, you still have the images with the watermark, and the original hi-res images as well to prove they're yours. In Photoshop, got to Filter > Digimarc > Embed Watermark... There you can use a standard one, or create your own with ID numbers registered at Digimarc's web site, adjust the visibilty, etc.
Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.
Instead of using images.google.com, why do you not go to websites specialized on this topic?
Go to dmoz.org and browse through the categories a little bit, you will come up with following categories:
All you have to do now is to browse through the sites and have a peek at the license. Mostly you will have to give them some credit somewhere. If it is not clear from the license if you can use the images in a free software then contact the archive owner directly.
You do not get automatically right to use some image on your site/app only because everybody else is doing it.
I agree with this post
jebus, man, get a freaking life. back away from the keyboard, fan-boy...
This is kind of in the same vein, but what if you were to do something akin to what rappers/hip-hop artists do when they sample?
I see it ALL over the web were someone has changed another site's image -- or altered it and incorporated it into another image -- where does one stand in this regard? Is this legal? (Or, as Ali G would ask, "What is legal?")
Looking at this strictly from a legal standpoint, is permission still required here regardless of what is done to said image(s)?
2) Red alert. Go to red alert. Fag alarm. This fucking vidiot sexless fat poor health bad physical condition racist fat ultra left wing nationalist asshole idiot is speaking
GO TO RED ALERT. Space and Time are grinding to a halt.
Fucking idiot SHITSTAIN McGuspaz is speaking.
Fat man living off of government or with parents with no sex jerking off to pedophile porn and trolling Slashdot is speaking. WOOP WOOP.
Captain, people cant take much more of this shit. I'm giving it all shez got.
The alien Guspaz, with his corpulent fat face and fronds of flash drooping over belly into cheap assed keyboard try is coming. He farted on the left nacelle!
NO!!!!! That will massage his prostate, GUSPAZ likes anal pleasure, we must go to warp 69!
FAT SEXLESS GUSPAZ pursues the captain in a long brown skidmarking journey through space.
Fat fucking pig. Fat stupid. All Your Base Are Belong To Us was meant to be funny, its not the 11th commandment you dumb motherfucker.
FUCKING ASSHOLE ALARM.