I Google images for my blog but don't ever credit where I got them from.
Is this wrong? Will I one day get my comeuppance? Luckily I am too rebellious and tough to even care. And I've covered my tracks well too.
If the authorities track me down, all the clues will lead them to an abandoned homestead, in North-Western New South Wales. There they will find my calling card, which has a clever, cryptic note on it (which is too clever and/or cryptic to mention here).
Ben McLaughlin isn't even my real name.
Huldra Forsvant (Theodor Kittelsen)
Huldra Forsvant (Theodor Kittelsen)
20 comments:
Just you wait. I'm going to track down one of your animations and post it on my blog without attribution... then we'll see who doesn't care about copyright...
I don't make 'animations', for Ben McLaughlin doesn't exist. My true occupation is cloaked in mystery, thus my work is untouchable . You can't catch what you cannot see. I am a mist, a vapour.
I did this for a bit, then decided I'd stop.
Now the images that go up are either my own photos, or taken from Flickr's creative commons search.
Hmmm... the Guitar Hero box art is actually linked from eBay. It'll probably get deleted shortly.
ok, well to be serious then, do you reckon it's something I need to think about? If I was to use someones obvious creation, I would say so, but most of the pictures I use are kind of silly and non descript... do I REALLY have to credit those? It seems silly.
You could always use Wikipedia images - if you click on an image on Wikipedia it will tell you if it's copyright free or not straight away...
I'm not sure. I don't know if it comes under "fair use" or not. I just decided I wouldn't do it.
I know some people get annoyed if you use their stuff, and linking directly to someone else's images is a definite no-no (so not uploading your own copy of their image), as it costs them money (in theory) every time someone looks at your page.
I know of one guy who puts a disclaimer on his blog saying who made the image, and a notice saying if they want him to remove it, let him know and he will.
It's all a bit murky, I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't treading on anybody's toes.
Lairdy, I think that would be fine for a few things, but if I'm looking for some random thing, I doubt I'd find what I was looking for.
Rodeo, that disclaimer idea sounds ok, I guess. It all just frustrates me as it seems petty. If someone took one of my paintings or something and put it on their blog and said 'here's a painting I did' well, sure, I'd get chizzy. But if someone wanted a picture, say, of a sunny day for a particular post, and googled one of my paintings of a sunny day, well, I couldn't care less if they used it, and didn't say where it was from.
I don't know. Is this one of those 'weaker brother' issues? Or am I the weaker brother who needs to start playing by the rules- even if they're sorta dumb/
True, but some of the time when you do a Google image search you'll notice they're from Wikipedia. If you click on it, go to Wikipedia and the image is from "Wikipedia Commons" my understanding is it's all cool:)
Hey Ben,
I know it sounds petty, and I'm sure the vast majority of people are just like you in that respect, but there are going to be a few who aren't.
Personally, I saw it as a witness-type thing, and for the same reason I don't pirate software, I don't use someone else's art without asking first (and I have asked in the past). It's the law, even if it sucks.
That being said, I also don't think anyone would ever fine you for it (not without fining every other person on the internet).
It's like how you used to not be able to (legally) copy your CDs and put them on your mp3 player...
I know what you're saying, and God has been working thru my conscience a lot over a few issues. A stack of the music I had on my mp3 player was from cd's I'd borrowed from the library. For ages I felt fine with that, but then I suddenly felt convicted to wipe it all. And the same thing with the Photoshop tha had always been on my home computer.
Maybe this is another one of those things God is wanting me to change. I hope not, because to me it seems different. Well, I'll keep thinking about it.
ps- was it really illegal to put your own cd's onto your mp3 player?? All of the music on mine is from my cd's. That is craziness. Has that law been changed? Please say yes..
I know EXACTLY how you feel with the conscience issues (it's annoying sometimes, isn't it?).
The mp3 law changed a few years ago, so now I've got all legit stuff (except for a few songs from sesame street... and some mashups. Not sure on the legal status of either of those, I think they are ok - but I have no laws to back that feeling up).
I'm not sure if the laws are different in Australia, but a woman in Minnesota was just ordered to pay 1.9 million for 'sharing' approx 15 songs on the internet. Copyright infringement. That's just absurd. If you own the CD, I don't see why you couldn't put it on your player. You own both....as for something you got at the library, I don't know. Everything's just crazy.
Ben, stop now. Don't ask any more questions or follow this rabbit hole to its natural conclusion.
If you do, your conscience (okay, God) will get the better of you and you will end up with a blog that has lots of lovely words but no pictures, none, not even of a funny dog or an oddly dressed celebrity - i.e. OUR BLOG.
I don't see why there would be no pictures, he's proved to be quite the artiste. Maybe he should just art up some stuff for every single post.
That'd be cool too (but probably have significant impact on posting).
I'm being dramatic, RC ;)
But what happens is time gets the better of you. I had these grand ideas of posting up original drawings and photography for our blog, but it never happened - effort factor being way high.
Love your paintings and drawings, Ben. It would be cool to see more of them in your posts!
I know Beth, it all gets ridiculous. Rules that don't make a lot of sense.
:) True, Soph, it would become a pictureless blog. Sure I like to draw and paint, but they require a lot more time and effort than a quick google. Honestly, if I was providing all the pics, there would be a post every two weeks, because I'd totally lose interest. Part of the fun is finding some dumb picture that you stumble across. Often I'm not looking for a specific thing, but then I come across something I wouldn't have thought to type in.
Anyway, can we maybe forget that I brought this whole thing up?? Pretty please?
"I know some people get annoyed if you use their stuff, and linking directly to someone else's images is a definite no-no (so not uploading your own copy of their image), as it costs them money (in theory) every time someone looks at your page."
Just to touch on this point from RC - I wouldn't say that's always true.
It's probably more dodgy to download someone's image and upload it to your server than it is to hotlink it.
I'd say your best bet is to hotlink it with a link to the actual source in the content of your post (as an acknowledgement).
But then I do this all the time when I'm putting a post on my blog about stuff people are selling or exhibiting that tickles my fancy.
I wouldn't really do it for someone's photos... unless they fit that category.
And most attributed usage of images is a form of promotion rather than stealing so it's a slightly different context to the use Ben is suggesting... I don't think that "general rule" applies generally. It's just something polite to take into consideration.
Nathan's got it right - it IS dodgy to copy and upload someone else's work.
I was talking more about using someone's artwork or photographs as though they were your own, not pictures of products or when discussing an artwork for instance. I wasn't saying you should do this at all, but if you ARE going to flog it off as your own, don't link it, then you are ripping the other artist off twice - by making it seem like the artwork is your own, AND by making them pay for hosting it!
i guess i don't really know where this line will be drawn.. Ok, I am cool if it's some bloke's photo from flikr that i use. Fair enough.
But what about the photo of David Hasselhoff I used today? That's someone's photo too. But surely I don't have to track down the 'artist', do I?
It's probably more dodgy to download someone's image and upload it to your server than it is to hotlink it.
I've seen people who have said "If you're going to use this picture, please upload it yourself and don't directly link it". (And of course they usually ask for credit too).
Post a Comment