[NSC] Rights protected Images

[WATFORD zero]

After using images in my posts for years, yesterday I twice fell foul of the rules concerning rights protected images on NSC, (quite rightly as it puts NSC at risk of copyright claims). I am now stepping into BG's size 14s (I would have imagined) and looking for some technical advice.

How do you check if an image is protected ?

The first image I used was of a sleeping cat that had text on it related to the image and I can now see that was obviously Rights protected. The second image however was a picture of the current cabinet with no such 'clue' as to it's origin.

I have looked up and Google suggests that you do the image search, go to settings, select 'advanced search', go to the drop down 'usage rights' and select 'free to use or share'. However in the drop down, all I'm getting is 'Creative Commons Licences' or 'Commercial and other Licences' (BG would be proud ). Am I doing something wrong or is this because none of the images returned are actually free to use ?

Is the only safe way to go, to avoid images completely ? Whilst reading NSC this morning I've noticed a couple of attached images that are protected so I am wondering whether we should stop using any images that weren't created by ourselves. I'm sure someone better qualified than me will know the answers

 

[Bozza]

I owe you a PM reply on this but I've not had the chance yet.

There was a recent discussion on this here for some background: https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?394197-Breach-of-Copyright-Help!

In short, if you didn't create the image yourself and can not be absolutely sure the image is free to be shared, then you shouldn\t be posting it on a website as there is a chance that, sooner or later, the rights holder or their appointed agent will locate it using programmatic searches and then issue a hefty invoice (likely many hundreds of pounds) for usage.

This is a big risk for NSC, something I've been aware of for some years but not addressed properly. Sooner or later that could very well bite me on the arse big time which could be the end of this website.

On my very long NSC "to do" list is an item to write some backend code to hide/delete every single post that either has an image attachment or uses the IMG tags to embed an image, as this will remove all images from public view and should mitigate much of the risk.

If you wish to bring an image to the attention of NSCers, the safe approach is to post a link to the image or a page where the image is located. It's not as nice as having an image embeded, I fully appreciate, but it comes with no risk.

 

[LamieRobertson]

You sure the cabinet one wasn’t removed on taste reasons

 

[zefarelly]

I've no idea where one stands and frankly don't care, lifes too short, but about 10-12 years ago I was surfing for a picture of my race car and stumbled upon a few images of it racing, except it wasn't, the first few were poor copies at cloning the livery, badly, and the next few were CGI images, someones made my car for one of the big computer games! Still not sure what to think of that! It was quite good though.

 

[Bozza]

To add...

If an image looks professionally shot (like, for example, almost any action shot from a Premier League match) it will almost certainly have usage fees associated with it.

One way of determining this is to use Google reverse image search: https://images.google.com

1. Click the camera icon in the search bar
2. Upload the image you have downloaded from somewhere else
3. Check the results

If the image has been used in a lot of other places then, again, it almost certainly belongs to an agency that charges for usage.

If you click through to some of those other sites, such as the BBC, Sky or a news site, you'll probably see the image attributed to a photo agency such as the PA or Getty etc. Again, this will confirm that you need to pay to use the image, and should give you a sufficient clue to go to the agency and find out how much you would need to pay. It generally varies on how you wish to use the image and, if online, how many views the image is likely to have, but it will almost certainly be far more than you wish to pay in order to include it on a post on a messageboard.

 

[BBassic]

Google Images has an option to filter your image search results so you're only shown images licensed under the Creative Commons License as well. I use this a lot in various creative projects.

1. Go to images.google.com
2. Make your search
3. Click 'Tools'
4. Click 'Usage Rights'
5. Click 'Creative Commons licenses'

EDIT: See post #10. CC licenses do sometimes require attribution.

 

[GT49er]

Quick question - is there any risk in including images from Youtube (happens most of the time on music threads, which many of us contribute to) - or from Faceook for that matter?

 

[BBassic]

Quick question - is there any risk in including images from Youtube (happens most of the time on music threads, which many of us contribute to) - or from Faceook for that matter?

As far as I'm aware the risk there lies solely with the uploader of the video.

I've got a YouTube channel and when I upload a video YouTube scans the content for any copyrighted material. You can still upload that video if any copyrighted material is found but you cannot monetise it and you will certainly be open to a claim from the copyright holder.

 

[Insel affe]

Quick question - is there any risk in including images from Youtube (happens most of the time on music threads, which many of us contribute to) - or from Faceook for that matter?

Bang goes "Post your favourite song" thread then.

 

[KZNSeagull]

There are 6 creative commons licences so you need to be careful as to how you can use the image as some require attribution. Getty Images are red hot on picking up on unlicensed usage on news websites (fell foul of that once and got an invoice within 6 hours of posting!), not sure about forums though but I would avoid them altogether. There is the old argument that once it is posted anywhere on the internet it is already in the public domain, but that does not wash especially with the large firms.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Bang goes "Post your favourite song" thread then.

Nothing wrong with posting a link to YouTube - any copyright issues would be dealt with on YouTube and not NSC.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I've no idea where one stands and frankly don't care, lifes too short, but about 10-12 years ago I was surfing for a picture of my race car and stumbled upon a few images of it racing, except it wasn't, the first few were poor copies at cloning the livery, badly, and the next few were CGI images, someones made my car for one of the big computer games! Still not sure what to think of that! It was quite good though.

I had the same sort of experience. A couple of years back I was googling me and my brother's fanzine from the seventies. Turned up loads of search results - mainly because some company had nicked the front cover and turned it into a range of posters, teeshirts and tote bags

Just tried the same search today. Some artist/designer type has once again nicked the front cover (different issue number!), tweaked it a little bit and stuck it on the front of a teeshirt that retails for £210!

Like you, don't know quite what to make of it. Quite flattering I suppose and nice to think the cover of the fanzine we inked and xeroxed and sold for 20 pence all these years ago has acquired a secondlife

 

[GT49er]

Bang goes "Post your favourite song" thread then.

Yes, that's what I'm asking about. Hopefully, as suggested above, the risk lies with the person who uploaded it to Youtube.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Yes, that's what I'm asking about. Hopefully, as suggested above, the risk lies with the person who uploaded it to Youtube.

I would have thought that Youtube would block the option of embedding a video into other websites if there was an issue with doing that.

 

[Fungus]

I had the same sort of experience. A couple of years back I was googling me and my brother's fanzine from the seventies. Turned up loads of search results - mainly because some company had nicked the front cover and turned it into a range of posters, teeshirts and tote bags

Just tried the same search today. Some artist/designer type has once again nicked the front cover (different issue number!), tweaked it a little bit and stuck it on the front of a teeshirt that retails for £210!

Like you, don't know quite what to make of it. Quite flattering I suppose and nice to think the cover of the fanzine we inked and xeroxed and sold for 20 pence all these years ago has acquired a secondlife

 

[Fungus]

I owe you a PM reply on this but I've not had the chance yet.

There was a recent discussion on this here for some background: https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?394197-Breach-of-Copyright-Help!

In short, if you didn't create the image yourself and can not be absolutely sure the image is free to be shared, then you shouldn\t be posting it on a website as there is a chance that, sooner or later, the rights holder or their appointed agent will locate it using programmatic searches and then issue a hefty invoice (likely many hundreds of pounds) for usage.

This is a big risk for NSC, something I've been aware of for some years but not addressed properly. Sooner or later that could very well bite me on the arse big time which could be the end of this website.

On my very long NSC "to do" list is an item to write some backend code to hide/delete every single post that either has an image attachment or uses the IMG tags to embed an image, as this will remove all images from public view and should mitigate much of the risk.

If you wish to bring an image to the attention of NSCers, the safe approach is to post a link to the image or a page where the image is located. It's not as nice as having an image embeded, I fully appreciate, but it comes with no risk.

Do you think we need a front page sticky warning? This sounds like a potentially very serious issue.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Well here's the £210 teeshirt. The guy tweaked it by pasting over a photo of The Fall with what looks like a rip-off of a Picasso sketch

Before...



After...



(Let's see the bastid moan about infringement of copyright on THAT one )

 

[Bry Nylon]

Bang goes "Post your favourite song" thread then.

So what you’re saying then is, it’s not all bad news

 

[Insel affe]

So what you’re saying then is, it’s not all bad news

Shut it and get back to fiddling with your cue.

 

[Boys 9d]

Does this help?

http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/fair-use