Secrets of the City

Just another nail in the coffin.

They’re a newspaper for cripes sake! If you used an image from them without citation, what would they do? Giving a citation is not that difficult. Get on it CP!

As I just Tweeted, I am having to learn this as a new author on a national alternative fuels and vehicles blog that loves to add images.

But if I can learn to do it right, City Pages has no excuses.

I think The Deetz has too much time on its hands.

It’s true. How does he have the time to do this AND run the entirety of Minneapolis?

Not to mention his war on phonebooks…

Citations would be a good start, but I imagine companies like Bloomberg News, AP, and Getty Images expect for than a citation when their work is used.

That doesn’t answer our questions about where you find the time to do all this, Ed.

I think questioning how MNSpeakers use their work time is a pandora’s box we just don’t want to open.

Given the general disregard many people have toward things online like music copyrights, etc., I’m only surprised that this raises any questions at all. Somewhere, at sometime, the fabled Internet got to be considered a copyright-free zone, i.e. anything you found on the Web was free for the taking.

We get our dander up about the misuse or misappropriation of photographs but say “eh, so what” when we download “free” mp3s or bittorrent movies?

The whole concept of copyright was to both control the use of and fairly compensate the creator of any creative work. (Charles Schulz probably had a heart attack when he found out how some of his Peanuts imagery was being used without license in Japan ca. 1975. Example: A t-shirt of a very pregnant Lucy shouting at Charlie Brown “F**k you, Charlie Brown!”)

Speaking of which:

No, You Can’t Commercialize Obama [via Gawker.com]

I put all of my stuff online with a CC license, and I’ll let almost anybody use stuff as long as they link back. And, as I commented in Ed’s post, Andrea Swensson once used an image of mine, but requested permission first and gave credit.

But if somebody is demonstratably making money on my work, and I am not, that’s when I start to holler.

Searched for a picture of Matt’s Bar for a post two days ago. Found a picture of me at Matt’s Bar taken by Ed. Thankfully I credited it properly.

noodleman- I agree completely. Very few people have qualms about stealing music, which just kills me.

BUT, we are talking about a corporation stealing, not an individual. When City Pages makes a profit off of other people’s work that is a lot different then someone stealing music for personal use (which is still wrong people!)

I would spend no amount of money to see the recent “Speed Racer” movie. In fact, I probably ask for my time back, but this is an example. If someone said, here, watch it and tell me what you think. In some people’s view this is stealing.

It is only stealing if you believe it has value. You steal a piece of jewelry because you feel it has some sort of value to you. It may be to sell it or whatever. If you feel that it does not have any value to you, then you simply look at it and put it back. If you have some morbid curiosity to viewing or listening to some work, then it is not stealing if there was no intent of ever watching or listening to said work. You just view it and put it back.

In this example, the person who is doing the stealing, is the person who “fences” the work to you. It is the provider not the receiver. At best, you are receiving or purchasing stolen goods. However, if no currency changes hands, then there is no crime. The is particularly true if you had no intention on spending money on said song or video to begin with.

This is a bit off-topic but at what point do you define “profit” when speaking of something like derivative art?

Did Andy Warhol pay royalties to Campbell Soup for the use of the copany’s trademarked labeling? Is the AP due a royalty for each Shepard Fairey Obama “Hope” poster that is sold?

Campbell’s obviously gained beneficial branding and marketing via Warhol’s use of their trademark; the Associated Press not nearly so much.

Hoffman responds. And sounds contrite.

I also wonder about the definition of “commercial use.” Is a news story on a blog a “commercial use”? I put the CC license on my pictures, and allow non-commercial use… but plenty of bloggers who have Google Ads on their pages use my pictures. Is that commercial use? I figure commercial use is for commercials. Oh, like the time that a local realty company took one of my pictures, put it on a promotional postcard, and didn’t credit or compensate me.

@Jason

What constitutes commercial use certainly isn’t a settled issue. The license I use on flickr is non-commercial-attribution and according to the actual Legal Code commercial use is defined as follows:

You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation. (emphasis mine).

noodleman, you may be right about things becoming more liberal, but I have a hunch that the opposite may happen. Once search engines are smart enough to detect the duplicate use of photos, sites like CityPages will be in a world of hurt when Getty and AP can easily document every photo that was “courtesy” borrowed.

@Ed Kohler: I didn’t mean to imply any liberalization of concept; was just pointing out the general disregard nowadays toward copyright, citation and compensation that has grown along with the Internet. In parallel with the assumption by many that “it’s on the Internet, so it must be true” there is the widespread belief that “it’s on the Internet, so it must be free.”

I’m as guilty as anyone else for the periodic non-commercial use of unattributed photos. However, when I know the material will be used commercially, I will source photos from one of several royalty-free clip art services (e.g. clipart.com, photostock.com) that offer original material.

That’s not to say all of the world is going to copyright hell in a handbasket. I’ve been approached several times already about the use for publication of some of my vintage Japanese postcard collection. I don’t ask for any monetary remuneration; only a simple attribute and copy of the publication. So far, I’ve had images published in a German architectural digest, the journal of the Royal Academy of Engineers and a couple of books including one about the post-Restoration history of the Japanese food industry written by a Dutch academic!

Re: photo duplication detection. I can’t find the link right now, but there is a site that will track duplicate photos used by Russian marriage scammers.