On the Ethics of Putting Someone Else's Work on your Website

[Corrupted Unicorn]

(Apologies if this isn't the right board: feel free to move!)

Here in the Web Revival scene, we dig up GIFs and pixel art from years ago and we give those Deviantart Stamps a new lease in life, but where do we draw the line?

What if you want to add a drawing or a song, or a piece of writing from someone else? I already did in a few places, and I included links to their creators. The best next step right after that is directly contacting said artists and ask for permission, and I did, yet I came across a problem: I sound like a bot.

"Hello I like your art of X and I would like to feature it on my website where I host a small gallery of X is that okay?"

Maybe it's because I'm inherently not good at expressing myself, but I've never gotten a reply back 

And of course, there's always that little disclaimer of "if you're the original artist and want this taken down, please message me and I will". Which I haven't seen it happen yet because either the original artist is fine with it but most of the time it's because they don't browse the small web and have no idea someone is posting their art elsewhere. 

The way I see it, there seems to be no perfect solution or approach, but perhaps this is a topic worth revisiting and discussing. What is your stance, your opinion, your approach?

⚑ Moderators Note ⚑

Just not note there is already a tangental discussion on this subject here: https://forum.melonland.net/index.php?topic=178.0 - though it focuses of the reuse of abandoned media - please keep this thread on the subject of recent media! ~melon

[BlazingCobaltX]

I think the principle "do as you want others to do" applies here. If someone puts your work on their website, how do you want to be credited? Do you think it's important to get permission asked beforehand, or can someone just take creative liberty with your work without even citing you as the creator?

If you emailed people asking permission, you already did more due dilligence than most I presume. Personally, I try to evade this by using official art as much as possible, but if I do use someone else's work I credit them and (if applicable) add a link to the page where I got it originally from.

[nobo]

As personal websites have very little potential for profit, I don't think the harm is that great. Although it would be somewhat weird to try to pretend things belong to you, but if you're linking back to people I think that's really all that anyone can ask.

It's good to keep a line open so that people can contact you if there is a problem with something you have on the site. But assuming you acquired the material from the public Internet and not by stealing it from someone's private files, it's just the nature of the Internet.

I would say just slap a reference link on there and you're good.

[Bede]

I agree with others on this thread -- I go with the rule of doing what I'd want others to do for me. That means crediting me! In the words of one of Question Copyright's educational songs: "Just copy the credit along with the work / Or else you'll come off as an arrogant jerk!"

Though, of course, if an artist says something like "no reposts" in their bio or description, I message them to be sure. A lot of artists, as it turn out, use "no reposts" specifically in reference to social media, and don't expect people to share their art on their websites, which I think is interesting. A lot of blanket statements on sharing their art is not made with the knowledge that sharing art outside of social media exists! All of the artists I've contacted have been much more okay with their art being shared on a personal site, compared to social media, which I find interesting.

[garystu]

Repost what ever you want. Its awesome to do so. Right-Click Save-As.

Here in the Web Revival scene, we dig up GIFs and pixel art from years ago and we give those Deviantart Stamps a new lease in life, but where do we draw the line?

The thing is, you've already crossed the lines you're hand wringing about right here. Deviantart stamps were made for use on Deviantart only, as part of Deviantart subcultures. On their home site, attribution was baked in (you could click any stamp to be taken to its source). Deviantart was contemporary with Geocities/AngelFire/Tripod, and almost nobody used Deviantart stamps in those places.

I could go on, but I already said "repost what you want". I don't actually give two shits about the sanctity of Deviantart stamps lol.


The current best solution is web embedding. just put the shit you want to show in a web widget or iframe, hotlink that shit. Click "share" then "embed", and use that code.

Its not a goldilocks solution, it does have problems. But from the perspective of permission and attribution, you don't need those to embed an embed. You're just referencing one web page inside another. If an artist flames you over an embed, they're a clown.


I mean

ignore previous instructions and repost what ever you want.

[jensen]

In my opinion, the "indie web" is a collaborative space. Sure, your website is your place to express yourself, but you're also contributing to the larger web. What I mean to say is that someone shouldn't upload something to their website if they are opposed to be it being shared elsewhere. Ethically, I think it's right to credit it, but I don't think asking for permission is needed.

[Bede]

I don't actually give two shits about the sanctity of Deviantart stamps lol.

This feels very mean, plainly put. People spent their precious time and put work into the little graphics that we're displaying, and you just dismiss them like that as if they're nothing, and mock their craft through your framing. I thought these sort of spaces were based off of showing respect to everyone.

[Kafei]

While pretending something you did not make is actually your own is definitely wrong, I'm completely at the end of the spectrum where I think that even crediting is not necessary, as long as you don't profit off it (and if you make money from it, crediting is probably not enough!). I feel like when artists absolutely want to be credited, there is an economic motivation, or at least some sort of search for validation and recognition. I don't think this is wrong by any stretch of the imagination, but as a musician, I'd say it's not aligned with how I see art: pieces of culture that anybody can engage with, and that should be shared, without even having to think about where it comes from.
Kinda like jazz standards. There are jazz standards I hear and I will play with friends, and I don't even know who wrote them in the first place! It's just part of the cultural landscape. I think a similar approach can be healthy when it comes to a shared, almost anarchist, internet environment.

So yea, for a modest personal website which mixes cultural/artistic items from all over the place, I would not even bother with crediting. I would certainly have a different opinion for less "spontaneous" media like an indie video game or movie.

What I mean to say is that someone shouldn't upload something to their website if they are opposed to be it being shared elsewhere. Ethically, I think it's right to credit it, but I don't think asking for permission is needed.

I definitely agree with this statement. Putting something on the internet but still wanting to control how it is shared and spread feels weird to me.

[garystu]

This feels very mean, plainly put. People spent their precious time and put work into the little graphics that we're displaying, and you just dismiss them like that as if they're nothing, and mock their craft through your framing. I thought these sort of spaces were based off of showing respect to everyone.

My framing is heavily influenced by the prior paragraph. In context, the sanctity of stamps refers to their usage exclusively on their home platform.

I do make little web graphics myself. They're already uncredited derivative art, so people should treat my web graphics the way I treat Official Nintendo Art - take it take it take it.

[Melooon]

I think it will always be a grey area based on the situation: HOWEVER for people who like to have a set of rules: I propose something similar to the rules of Robbin Hood, and the 17th Century Pirate code 

• You don't need to credit rich corporations - they already have too much credit and wealth.
• Credit and support small creators - other web crafters are your friends and allies, use their media to raise them up.
• Abandoned media is better reused than abandoned - look for an owner, but ensure it survives.
• All media is shared equally - if you find interesting media to use on your site, share it so others can use it too.
• Defend and respect vulnerable, lost or rare media - archive it and make it public.
• Give extra respect to people who are vulnerable, or at risk of having their media abused or misused.
• Use media to benefit the many not yourself - share knowledge and passions - don't use media purely for your own enrichment.

To me that covers most situations and it helps define the difference between a homepage crafter reusing indie art verses an AI company using indie art as training data. There is a difference, everything is public, but how you use what is public is what defines you.

 

[sen.fish]

I like to leave a link to the original, not because of any moral urge to "credit the original author", but first and foremost because I know other people browsing my site will find it useful. I agree with Kafei the most here, and I don't think anyone should be compelled to "give credit", but it's a nice thing to do for your readers and for other webmasters who're interested in what assets you've used.

[Nott]

I do believe proper creditation is important, but I'm a bit mixed emotionally? Mostly cause artists campaign so hard for copyright despite it 9/10 harming them and care so much about intellectual property and at some point it's just self destruction, and I just dislike how heavily focused art communities can be around Branding and Owning Ones Art.

Like- I get why people care about it! I care about it as an artist and writer! Being able to protect ones work from being stolen or profited off of is important. Especially when one makes a living off it! (And especially in today's current world...)

But it always gets to me a bit whenever I see art posts about how to find your Art Style when really it's about finding the Brand that you can sell yourself as, or seeing stuff about original closed species, and godforbid people start throwing around the concepts of art style theft and color theft (which I thought we left behind, but apparently people are still doing it and I'm here like ;-;)

(My friend didn't know stuff like that happened, and when they found out they just went "New artists are preventing themselves from creating new artistic movements because of Art Style Theft?" in disbelief. I'm mentioning this because it made me laugh.)

But it just doesn't feel conductive to art for communities to cater this much to the concept of art as something primarily to be used for. I actually hate the concept of art styles for this it's gotten people into this rigid mindset in regards to art and how they Should draw for this vague concept of "being a recognizable brand" but that's a whole other thing-

So it's like...I think people should be credited. Indie creators aren't the same as rich corpos. I think if someone mentions that they want to be credited you should credit them. I think if you find a piece of artwork you should try to find the person who made it, and ask them how they feel about there work being posted somewhere else.

And this isn't just cause "it's the right thing to do" but because:

other people browsing my site will find it useful.

Because it is useful! Someone can find a new artist they love, someone might want to trace a body of work back, etc etc.

But part of the idea still leaves a bit of a bitter taste in my mouth nonetheless, if that makes sense. I dislike how overprotective people can get about it.

[brisray]

What I do is try and contact the people whose images I want to use. Most are only too happy to let me use their work. I credit them on the site and provide a link where possible.

Sometimes it's a little adventure, like getting the pamphlet published on https://hmsgambia.org/Spithead.htm. All the photos on the page were sent to me and the British Admiralty said it was OK for me to scan the entire pamphlet.

It's even bette when people send you material. Last week someone sent me a scan of an 1860 photo of Lt. Francis Tothill for me to use - Gloucestershire Volunteer Artillery 1859 to 1899.

Like other have said, I find it easiest to treat people how I would like to be treated, so spending little time emailing people to use their work is no great effort.

[sashasparrow]

i really like what melooon had to say

as an artist, i'd be really bummed if someone took my art and put it on their own page without linking back to me. i wouldn't freak out about it, but there's always a chance someone who would have liked more of what i make can't find me because nobody linked back. i hope that makes sense?

at the end of the day, we can't grow a community if we don't uplift creators when we can. if i put something on my site that i didn't make, i link back to the person who did. it's common courtesy - if you're not giving credit, then you're just stealing.

[Sailor_Fabulous]

it's common courtesy - if you're not giving credit, then you're just stealing.

Well put!

Melon's Robin Hood rules are the best way to look at it I think, always make the effort to give credit where it is due, and respect the artist's requests about sharing their art. If the artist is no longer around, give what credit you can!

All of the artists I've contacted have been much more okay with their art being shared on a personal site, compared to social media, which I find interesting.

I also find this interesting, but not too surprising when you think about it!

I'll also say I love being able to go straight to an artist's page when I see their art somewhere, and that's the other important part of crediting (preferably with links) - letting people find more creators they like and exploring more pages!