Warning: Sharing That Image Could Get You Banned or Blacklisted
Warning: Sharing That Image Could Get You Banned or Blacklisted
Most people have no idea that the way in which they are sharing images on #SocialMedia or on their blogs could actually get them banned, blacklisted, or worse!
In this next part of my Sharing Images Online series I take on the heavy task of explaining the legal side of sharing images in a simple way that everyone can understand.
Read the full post here: http://dustn.tv/sharing-images-responsibly/
It basically boils down to this - you either have explicit written consent to use an image, or you don't. And if you use someone's copyrighted image because you just so happened to find it online you risk having your social media account deleted/banned or your website blacklisted!
Let's all make the internet a better place for creators and curators alike and stop sharing images recklessly, and stop supporting those who knowingly (or unknowingly) do as well.
In the full post I tried to keep it as dead simple as possible but also note more in-depth reading of the subject from Peg Fitzpatrick, Ana Hoffman, and Sara Hawkins (image copyright expert).
Do you have any questions regarding the sharing of images? It's a dense topic, but following some basic best practices can make it simple.
#copyrightinfringement #blogging
Sharing images is the fundamental basis for pinterest. Hmmmm.
ReplyDeleteWithout images and the sharing of them, the internet would be relegated to university researchers. If the image is circulating on line then that's explicit consent. End of story. If the original person didn't want the image to circulate then dint post it. Hide it in your attic. We all know that they're is no privacy on the net out social media. So let's not talk out of both sides of our mouth.
ReplyDeleteCarmen Arif the fact that an image happens to be on line does NOT in any way constitute explicit permission for it to be shared. Try arguing that it does in any court of law and see how far you get.
ReplyDeleteOn a wider point. Copyright in the digital age makes the traditional stance of copyright defunct regardless of the legality of it. I'm not advocating piracy or plagiarism but when a model is clearly not working perhaps it is time to re-think it rather than trying to enforce the un-enforceable? A step in the right direction I think: https://creativecommons.org/
ReplyDeleteSure, Dustin W. Stout, I have tons of questions about this...
ReplyDeleteObviously the safe choice is to use either your own photography, or that which you have express written consent to use...
But what about the google images "search by usage rules"? Does that hold any weight or accuracy? What about Creative Commons 2.0, etc?
I recently sourced an image from Flickr, read the license carefully, modified the image, gave attribution for the original image, etc. Am I still at risk?
Renée Sharelle I don't disagree with any of your points. Sure Creative Commons won’t solve the problem and yes stealing is morally wrong. We do need something to protect content generators so they get fair reward for their endeavors.
ReplyDeleteWhere I think the problem lies is the copyright model that we have all grown up with does not work in the digital age. It is an un-enforceable model and we have to reinvent it.
To all that answered my post saying it's stealing. I never once said stealing was ok. But just like the ladies mom on fb is reposting everything she finds interesting, so do all of us. The internet world cease to be amazing if it had only letters or words in it. It would be boring. Just look at what makes Pinterest and fb and all the rest interesting. Images. Twitter is ok but it's definitely not going to hold much interest and without everyone on the internet then advertisers and what we do read works go away. Why do people immediately jump to conclusions? I'm advocating stealing. HELL NO I'M NOT. I'm advocating common sense. The internet would not be appealing without images. Let's take it to the extreme. The empire state building is in the background of one of my pics. It is privately owned. I have no right to photograph it without permission. The taxi cab, the passing vehicle, the shopping center, etc etc etc. It becomes ridiculous and stupid. So long as the images are being shared without a monetary gain then that's the end of the story. If you dint want them shared put them in your attic. If you make them public and they are shared for no monetary gain....... then stuff it!....or store it!!!.... but stop trying to be an attorney's pimp.
ReplyDeleteHaha, Dustin W. Stout! I had a #SWEET
ReplyDeletere-share/intro written for this and #DoShare timed out on me! #douchehairsometimes
~It was still worth the process though! This is definitely content to be pondered and obeyed! =D
Carmen Arif the argument of "If they didn't want me to steal it and use it in a way it wasn't meant to be, then they shouldn't have made it so easy" would never hold up in court. I know 3 people who could easily access your banking information as say the same thing-- you shouldn't make it so easy to get to and use!
ReplyDeleteArt is livelihood for most of us and to disrespect an artists work by sharing recklessly without credit is wrong no matter what you want to believe. It takes less than 30 seconds to look for or determine how the artist wants the image used/shared or cited.
Harry Chamberlain if the license was labeled as "Free to use, share and modify" then you're fine.
Renée Sharelle <--- #winning . :D
Kristin Drysdale doh! I hate it when that happens.
Dustin W. Stout really?? Ask anyone other than an artist how to look up the info and 90% of us don't know how. Maybe artists should have an easily accessible link next to every image.
ReplyDeleteRenée Sharelle ha!! You are one stubborn woman. Artists need to get into the 21st century. All those laws that you speak of are not made to work for the internet. You need to get a better argument.
ReplyDelete