Is it okay to use images without permission or crediting the artist?

[Kagayours]

Personally I just tend to grab and use images as long it fits the following requirements.

1) No Profit is being made
2) I'm not claiming it as my own

Yeah, that's pretty much my stance on it.

In communities like this, I feel like it's usually assumed that an image used in a CS (especially a particularly nice-looking one) probably wasn't made by the poster of the CS, unless the poster specifically says that they made it.

So long as we're all practicing honesty, I see no harm in that.

Although I do understand the concerns with things like taking images from sites like deviantART, as opposed to using images from well-known media like TV shows and video games and things, as it is a lot easier for your average internet user to claim ownership of it. You'd have a hard time posting a screenshot from something and claiming it's yours. Fanart, though? Or any original art, for that matter? Might be a bit easier to convince people otherwise.

But, assuming you're not being a dick and claiming ownership like that, then it seems rather harmless to me.

Also,

I imagine so. I started reading some source material on the subject a few minutes ago and basically the gist of the whole copyright vs fair use is tipped more often in favor of the public benefit. It's done on a case by case value and won't prevent you from being sued, but there isn't any hard and fast rule of what is fair use vs what is copyright infringement. The whole thing is pretty murky and even a lot of the articles agree that fair use vs copyright & the internet are all pretty much in infancy stages right now.

So I guess the moral of the story is be as responsible as you can according to what I'm reading?

It all looks really murky with a bunch of fancy lawspeak to me. I guess that's why I'm not a lawyer.

Yeah, fair use isn't strictly enforced according to any precise definition. In addition to what Brovo posted, there are other criteria for what falls under fair use, such as whether or not the person using the copyrighted material is making any profit off of it, whether or not the use of copyrighted material causes potential loss of profits for the copyright holder, how much of the copyrighted material was used, etc. All of these are taken into consideration when determining whether or not something falls under fair use, and, yeah, it's very case-by-case. Fair use is a defense, not an automatic protection, and whether or not something falls under fair use can often be debatable.

I don't see it as "murky" so much as allowing for common sense. It would be rather difficult to write a strictly-worded law to try to cover all the nitty-gritty of it and really set specific boundaries, I think. Plus, lots of people would argue that copyright law (in its current state) already favors large corporations at the expense of the smaller creators that it is also supposed to protect. Trying to set definitive guidelines for what is and, more importantly, what specifically isn't fair use could easily make the problem worse and wind up screwing over content creators for doing what many would have previously considered acceptable. Remember SOPA? It raised a lot of the same concerns.

BUT UM

BACK TO THE TOPIC OF ROLEPLAY COMMUNITIES SPECIFICALLY

Like I said, I pretty much go by common sense, and, in particular, the same guidelines that Gwazi posted. So, tl;dr, I'm alright with using images from elsewhere for RP purposes.

Edit: I feel the need to clarify that I'm certainly no expert on the legal aspect of all this and that I'm mostly just regurgitating what I recall from the several lessons on copyright and fair use that I have received in various art classes. I'm still fairly certain that fair use is rather case-by-case, though.

 

[Hellis]

I'm a scallywag

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

So if I were to ever enter an art contest, I'd be giving credit to the artwork in question.

Dawned on me I should clarify this bit.

I'm not suggesting that in an Art Contest I'd simply steal an entire piece outright but then simply add a disclaimer.
I'm saying the bits and pieces I use to create my own works would be credited.

Got the background from somewhere nice? Credit it.
Got the tank from someone? Credit them.

 

[Lea]

Hmm...I don't know the shiz you guys(and girls too) are spouting but I don't take time to do none of that credit stuff when using a picture. Reasons why is because:

1. I don't give two craps on the pics I take because this shiz has been done since the beginning of recorded history, so why stop now?

2: Because most of the artists that made them don't give a ship!! If they did, most of us would either be consulting our lawyers or would be taking these pics down(Probably this one since it's easier to do in the real world). If anything, people walking around with their pictures act as advertissment for various companies since us unintentional theives be attractting more followers and all that good stuff. Ask yourself this, when was the last time you wanted to buy, watch or wear something after seeing a pic of it being posted up on a social media site by an ignorant adolescent? ...oh right, I'll leave you to your thoughts.

Hmm...if you choose to take credit for someone else's work however then that's another story...though I doubt something will happen to you as long as you don't attenpt to create an enormous following off of that one lie. With my input in this silly cause for a debate in here, I'm out... - Vanishes -

 

[Kakumei]

Because most of the artists that made them don't give a ship!!

Us Artists do give a ship.

 

[Shadon Xarian]

Us Artists do give a ship.

Well then it looks like that ship has sailed :D :D :D :D :D
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


Wasn't it a universal rule of sorts that if an artist didn't want their stuff to be public (Per se) they put up a water mark/put their signature on it, and if they do not do that, then it was fair game? (In a matter of speaking)

 

[Kakumei]

Wasn't it a universal rule of sorts that if an artist didn't want their stuff to be public (Per se) they put up a water mark/put their signature on it, and if they do not do that, then it was fair game?

Watermarking just makes it harder for fledgling artists to steal another persons work. It doesn't serve much of a purpose beyond that.

But they are super easy to edit out, and others will just trace over the drawing completely.

 

[Celestial Scorpio]

Yes and no. I think it honestly comes down to the artist. There are one's that won't mind and there are one's that will mind. I never credit any pictures, and if I use a picture that someone doesn't want me to use I will find a new one out of respect. So if you use a picture and someone asks you to take it down just do so and find another one because being an ass and saying "It was on the internet so I can use it." makes you look like shit. Also if someone claims a picture as theirs just look it up and it may or may not be hard to find who the real artist is. Nowadays it is easy for people to steal art but it is also not hard to look up the sources and whatnot. I have easily found a photo someone used saying it was them and it wasn't by simply taking the picture and searching for it. I found the who actually was the person and where they took the picture from. In the end just be a good person and take down any picture that is asked to be taken down, if not credit if you would like, but never plagiarize.

 

[Lea]

Us Artists do give a ship.

Maybe you and just a few others because if that was true, then where are all the complaints at? I've been an rper for nearly a decade and not once have I been contacted by an artist(both directly and indirectly) due to me using their pics...or for any other reason xD

@Hellis: Bruh...bruh....why're you spreading something that everyone already knows? Everyone should know by now that I don't jump into the debate game sober...or at least I hope so :D

 

[Flame]

Long as I or others aren't profiting off of someone's work without their consent, or claiming it to be our original work when it's clearly not, I don't particularly care. I think of it in a way of what if I was the artist who's work was being used? I wouldn't care if someone used it as the face of their character on a roleplaying site, long as they didn't claim they drew it. But if the rp somehow becomes a book or movie or whatever, they'd better make their own image or credit me. I think those who hate the idea of people using their work even if they aren't making profit or claiming it to be theirs are probably assholes anyway, even when they are withing their rights. I've seen a couple situations where people have asked their works to be removed (on other sites, and not to me) and they were rarely polite about it.

Besides, the internet is a big place, and if a lot of people use your image (profits and popularity blah blah) you'll probably be wasting your breath trying to stop it. The time you could spend making more art would be wasted defending your precious art from randoms on the internet. I think that's all so... I'll go to bed now.

 

[SamIO]

But would you be polite to somebody who'd stolen your car?

Something we Internet denizens don't value — precisely because the Internet is such a big place, and so much digital information is easily copied — are digital properties. There is a significant population among the Internet community which does not value video games or music or images, and freely use and distribute them as if they were public domain content. When they take from big corporations, they're called pirates. They have made it clear that the Internet is not a safe place for digital property, and as a result of that subcommunity's significance in the fledgling Internet culture, we've inherited that belief.

It is thus not intuitive to us that copying a random picture from Google Images can often be actual, criminal theft; it isn't clear to us that watching a Youtube upload of an original soundtrack album is ingesting bootlegged content. It's obvious that piracy is illegal only because the media has made a big deal of it on occasion, but it's so accessible that some users still don't recognize how sincere the threat of legal reprimand is.

And I'm not saying that all of these behaviors are wrong morally, but I think it should be understood that we're not talking about whiny teenagers trying to "own" their work. We're talking about people protecting their property, just like any person would their car.

 

[Brovo]

it isn't clear to us that watching a Youtube upload of an original soundtrack album is ingesting bootlegged content.

Actually, this is a bit grey area and tends to be a poor example. Mainly because YouTube has a massive library of audio algorithms that detect the music and then monetize it via ads, allowing record labels to continue to profit (and YouTube by extension, who take a cut out of all ad revenue) without the uploader having any say in the matter. You are technically correct in that it can be considered bootlegged content, but the legal argument against is often that sharing music with your friends is not illegal. (Ex: Listening to an album you bought and paid for with people who did not buy it and pay for it.)

Ergo, why it's always, 100% of the time, the uploader who gets hit with DMCA take down notices, and not any of the people who listened to it. You can't practically sue someone over listening to a clip or song on YouTube, even if it was illegally uploaded. The same applies to ripped anime streams and the like: Not technically illegal for the viewer, but very shady nonetheless.

Which is why uploading or posting art which is not your own, for purposes not covered by Fair Use, is definitely illegal: You aren't just looking at it, you're taking a copy for yourself.

Otherwise, you pretty much nailed it and I completely agree with you. I just figured I'd quickly note that little loophole in copyright where it concerns just hearing or seeing something which is illegal--not inherently illegal in and of itself, unless you take and keep a copy for your own purposes without paying for it.

 

[Kakumei]

Maybe you and just a few others because if that was true, then where are all the complaints at? I've been an rper for nearly a decade and not once have I been contacted by an artist(both directly and indirectly) due to me using their pics...or for any other reason xD

Yes, because every artist has time to go around on the internet and look for people using their work for roleplays, simply to ask if they would source them or take down the picture.

You aren't simply just using somebodies pretty picture. Artists tend to identify themselves with their work. You use their work without so much as sourcing them, and you literally take something from them.

Its not hard at all to have just the tiniest amount of respect. It takes what? 2 Minutes to find out the source to a drawing?

It takes artists hours to create it.

 

[Shiri]

Copyright law is exactly the reason why I stay away from the Character Bank here. Last I checked it requires an image for some reason? I like to be pretty careful with what I use even on roleplay sites. Even my avatar is a combination of public domain images and and image from a game company that has expressed disinterest so long as there isn't profit made from their stuff. Heck even my signature gives credit to the gif maker just in case. xD But as time goes on I am more inclined to make my own icon and signature to be honest. The copyright paranoia is real. Haha.

 

[Kakumei]

Copyright law is exactly the reason why I stay away from the Character Bank here. Last I checked it requires an image for some reason? I like to be pretty careful with what I use even on roleplay sites. Even my avatar is a combination of public domain images and and image from a game company that has expressed disinterest so long as there isn't profit made from their stuff. Heck even my signature gives credit to the gif maker just in case. xD But as time goes on I am more inclined to make my own icon and signature to be honest. The copyright paranoia is real. Haha.

Yeah, but usually if you just source the image, its okay. Which is apparently too hard to do for some people. Lol

 

[Brovo]

Copyright law is exactly the reason why I stay away from the Character Bank here. Last I checked it requires an image for some reason? I like to be pretty careful with what I use even on roleplay sites. Even my avatar is a combination of public domain images and and image from a game company that has expressed disinterest so long as there isn't profit made from their stuff. Heck even my signature gives credit to the gif maker just in case. xD But as time goes on I am more inclined to make my own icon and signature to be honest. The copyright paranoia is real. Haha.

Also, in all likelihood, because of how prohibitively expensive taking someone to court is for something as small as copy-pasting a picture, they're far more likely to just give you a DMCA. IE: A warning.

 

[Minerva]

Someone we barely know once took a picture of our cat from my mom's Facebook page and painted it without our permission.

We now have a painting of our cat hanging on our wall.

Anyway, I want to say that:

I feel like as long as you're not making money off of it, claiming that it is your work and yours alone, or not insulting the artist in some way besides a parody, then you're good. If they do find out and ask you to take it down, though, do so. It was their will that they asked it to be taken down, so you should take it down.

 

[Flame]

But would you be polite to somebody who'd stolen your car?

Something we Internet denizens don't value — precisely because the Internet is such a big place, and so much digital information is easily copied — are digital properties. There is a significant population among the Internet community which does not value video games or music or images, and freely use and distribute them as if they were public domain content. When they take from big corporations, they're called pirates. They have made it clear that the Internet is not a safe place for digital property, and as a result of that subcommunity's significance in the fledgling Internet culture, we've inherited that belief.

It is thus not intuitive to us that copying a random picture from Google Images can often be actual, criminal theft; it isn't clear to us that watching a Youtube upload of an original soundtrack album is ingesting bootlegged content. It's obvious that piracy is illegal only because the media has made a big deal of it on occasion, but it's so accessible that some users still don't recognize how sincere the threat of legal reprimand is.

And I'm not saying that all of these behaviors are wrong morally, but I think it should be understood that we're not talking about whiny teenagers trying to "own" their work. We're talking about people protecting their property, just like any person would their car.

Yes, but hundreds of people can't steal your car at the same time. The car in question is also still in your possession, yet tons of other people have it. I get what you mean but your comparison is screwy.

Anybody I have ever met who cried foul didn't eat off their art. They were just pricks.

Secondly, a simple image is not as valuable as a car either. And if it is, it begs the question, why would anybody with a brain knowingly use that image if they knew they could get their ass in hot water over it? We're talking about the value of images an artist uses to live off of, but, to be honest, I also don't or haven't seen many people who live off the sorts of images I use to represent my characters. Even if I did, I wouldn't know it. (unless I spent time looking that up, and nobody has time for that.) I just pull urls off of google when I find a nice image. How am I to know that this:

Literally the second image off of a google search

Is worth the price of a car? It's not the mona lisa, I don't recognize it as a valuable work of art. It's not even tangible. I would have just committed an act of piracy without even having known it. I didn't check the site, or if it had any copyrights, I just pulled it from google. If we're that concerned with our intellectual property being 'stolen' so easy, (even if the person at fault isn't profiting/isn't claiming it as theirs) maybe it shouldn't be so easy to 'steal'. But that's an almost untacklable problem. The problem is that it's not so easy to force these images to not just be pulled straight from a url. It's not that I disregard copyrights and shit, or that I'm a filthy immoral pirate with a penchant for stealing people's hard to make catgirls, (that they get their bread from, and each image is worth the price of a car) It's simply because I just wasn't aware.

I probably just parroted a few things you just said. Sorry, I skimmed it, and I'm tired. Also, you have valid points. Don't feel like I'm picking on you or anything for running away with your car analogy, I just thought it was funny to go off the deep end with it. (DamnwhatamIevensaying, ofcoursethey'llrecognizethehumor, Ijustneedsomesleep)

 

[Kakumei]

Anybody I have ever met who cried foul didn't eat off their art.

I'm not crying foul. But I actually do eat off my art.

And the only thing I really want is recognition as the creator. That way, people who are interested will come by one of my art shops on one of my sites, and commission me for a piece of work, so that I can keep eating.

Again, I beg the question... Is it really that hard to source someone? Because that's what artists want most.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

Technically the only people who eat off their art are those who decorate plates for a living. :3

In all seriousness though:

I should disclaim, I do ultimately agree with you Utsuho.
But there a few points here I find us disagreeing on.

Mainly I think the disagreement is you're seeing it in a "It's too hard to track so why bother" outlook while I see it in a "No one's harmed*, so people should get so worked up over it".

*Exception is when it really is a paid for piece.
But the cases where this has been the case of picture 'theft', and the artist didn't do something stupid like post it publicly/free (where people copying it will happen) is pretty rare.

Anybody I have ever met who cried foul didn't eat off their art. They were just pricks.

Generally I do find this too, but I do need to ask two questions here.

1) How do you know if they are or not?
2) If you do, how do you know they aren't trying to get to the point of eating off their art?

Secondly, a simple image is not as valuable as a car either. And if it is, it begs the question, why would anybody with a brain knowingly use that image if they knew they could get their ass in hot water over it?

Let's remember this is the same world where people can sell a blank blue canvas for 44 Million, and where people can leave garbage in the middle of an art museum and people will actually confuse it as art.

(unless I spent time looking that up, and nobody has time for that.)

Admittedly I don't do this either. But other's did just spend an entire page detailing how easy it is to do.

Now I personally wouldn't suggest having to start this practice for the sake of someone who throws things out publicly but then get's mad when it's used publicly.
But it is easy enough to do where that situation does pop up, it's easy enough to do just to confirm the artist's claims.
And if those claims end up being correct? Then at that point respect their wishes.

Are they being pissy about it? Yea. But it's a free country, it's their right to be pissy about it.