zagzagael ([info]zagzagael) wrote,
@ 2008-04-20 09:48:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Photobucket

In an effort to understand the general feeling regarding image theft and to help efficiently compile my own thoughts on image theft and orphaned images and sharing images online, I thought I would posit some questions to the flist. I would love to hear you hold forth about your views and opinions regarding the theft of online images and the hows and whys of protecting said images. I do hold established and fairly strong opinions and thoughts about this myself, but am always open to hearing the viewpoints of others. As I am going to be teaching a few photography panels at Dollectable this summer, I'm sure the subject will come up and I would really enjoy having a well-rounded idea of how most people in the hobby view these subjects.

First, let me say that whatever my opinion is, in no way does that devalue or lessen your own opinion. And in no way am I suggesting that anyone is wrong or daft for thinking a thing.

I am a professional photographer. I get paid money to create images. Sometimes I get paid obscene amounts of money and sometimes I get paid modest amounts of money. I have had my images posted online for pay and printed in publication for pay. I have sold images as stock and created images for stock. I have shared a lot of my own work (non-people) online and have had some of my images printed in publications with no financial recompense. I have also had images stolen from me. I had an entire maternity portraiture article with photo illustrations lifted off my website and posted as an "interview" in a pregnancy ezine with NO PERMISSION or CONTACT whatsoever. I have had poses and lighting styles "stolen" and advertised as another photographer's original idea.

And you know what? It's all good. I don't really care if my work is taken. Why would I? And that's where my questions for the flist begin. Why are some folks so deeply concerned about image theft? Is it a loss of perceived monetary income? Is it a concern about legal model releases? Is it about not being credited?

Why don't I care, you ask? Well, because I KNOW the amounts of money paid for photographic work in most industries and it's nominal. Truly. Print publication for photos of just about anyone who is not a celebrity is just not even going to buy you a sushi dinner and a bottle of warm saki. Creative Theft - of poses and lighting, IS infuriating to me, but I know for a fact there is no way to market such ideas nor to copyright a pose. It just cannot be done. I did have a gal, locally, who decided to hone in on my maternity photography - not my birth or breastfeeding since I have worked hard to create special access to such image-making - and I thought about it for a long time, weighed my options, morally and legally, and ultimately decided that there's enough fish to fry for all of us and I just ignored her and her attempts to shove me out of the way. I am still working she has moved on. Being perpetually pissed off or in competition just is NOT a good way to have the creative juices flow.

So, to sum that up - I'm not worried about monetary loss, nor do I care about not being credited or having my ideas stolen because it's just not mentally healthy. For me.

And I am perfectly capable of Idea Theft too - look at the idea I shamelessly stole from Georgia and photographed -

Photobucket

Another issue, with the dolls, at least. Is that we're already into a grey area regarding copyright. We don't own the copyright to photographically market images of the dolls. We don't. Those rights are held exclusively by the companies, ateliers and artists who have made the dolls. I suppose that's another reason why I don't sweat the thought of someone lifting one of my doll photos and using it for whatever nefarious purpose. Quite obviously, if Mr. Dollshe contacted me and said, "hey, we really dig your DS angels and want to hire you to take resin angel photos for us" the game changes completely and I would be working for recompense and you would not see those images posted here and if they were eventually lifted by someone, there would actually be a legal leg to stand on. In the meantime, I feel so jazzed that we are able to do what we like with our doll photos online that possible image theft of those photos is not something I take personally. And I have gladly donated some of my images to whomever has asked to use them.

I don't want to post my images covered with watermarks and I don't want to flock my doll photos. If some Chinese company lifts my low-res images and vectors them up to printable size and slaps them on pencil boxes, why should I be concerned?

Someone on DoA told me that illustrators have more invested in their work. I'm sorry, but that's not true. I did work as a graphic artist for a year for Tower Records back when we only had Apples and camera copy and things were finished by hand. I'm aware of the amount of work that goes on there. Good photography requires the same time and the same technical investments.

I really hope some of you will take the time to share your thoughts with me about these subjects.

(Post a new comment)


[info]kittymaru
2008-04-20 05:01 pm UTC (link)
I right click all the time and I don't f-lock my pictures for that purpose - I do it so I know exactly who has access to my LJ. I don't care if people right click my images and if they repost them because they like them or if they don't, more power to me.


The first image is beautiful, by the way.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 05:05 pm UTC (link)
Thanks, sweets.

Okay, so you're saying you don't think about image theft and it doesn't bother you - or that you don't mind as long as you know who has the image?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2008-04-20 05:58 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kittymaru, 2008-04-20 05:58 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 06:11 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kittymaru, 2008-04-20 06:21 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 06:30 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kittymaru, 2008-04-20 06:51 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]crybabymommie
2008-04-20 05:39 pm UTC (link)
to me there would be useless stress on both ends of the spectrum
worry about who takes/profits from a photo
worry about snarky theft for amusement[this is NEW to me..being not generation now-ish }
trying to watermark EVERY image{ugh}
******not like-ing stress...so...

I don't post any subject that would bother/compromise personal life
{that would pretty much include living/departed friends/family}..yea I would be mad if someone stole/hacked my pc for images
..BUT

my personal feeling:all other images are pretty much "set-free" by my posting them publicly
that said:
I've taken photos of stuff in museums{which is a no no}
I've argued for a long time that photography is ART which means
that yes it CAN be stolen/misappropriated/coveted just like a painting that you come across lol

I don't make a living as a photographer/but I have worked in that industry in the past,but never felt that theft would compromise my income any more than going to art school was going to put other artists out of work
inspiration from one source..carries over to another medium ...so hopefully if someone lifts something from one artist it will come back thru a public medium to inspire the first artist as some weird circle jerk..[this is prolly more cosmic and less "head in the sand as it sounds hopefully"

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 05:57 pm UTC (link)
Yep. And you've made perfect sense here. I, also, don't post much of my personal life stuff....for various reasons. And am not down with the LOLz generation....but have been made fun of before, so I try to be like a duck's back about it.

This, m'dear, was brilliant and inspirational - so hopefully if someone lifts something from one artist it will come back thru a public medium to inspire the first artist as some weird circle jerk..

Thanks!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]kittytoes
2008-04-20 05:51 pm UTC (link)
I hate to enter a discussion by just sating "I agree!", but I truly do. I don't really even understand the idea of image "theft" when we're the ones uploading them and sending them out into the ether. We loose control of them at that point, it seems crazy-making to be upset because someone has taken your image after you've made it public. Of course, it is nice to be properly credited, but no one is getting rich off of stolen photos. I don't bother with watermarks for the same reason. If it is upsetting to someone, and I do understand that it often is, then they simply shouldn't share them. Because we're sharing them, not just displaying them. It works the same way with ideas, really. And I would hope that the pleasure of sharing outweighs the immediate annoyance of having images or ideas taken.

"Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing." -- Dali

(Beyond all of that, I really really wish I could be photographed by you right now. That first image is amazing.)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 06:07 pm UTC (link)
Thank you, K, for offering your feelings and thoughts. That Dali quote is just priceless and I'm totally jazzed you shared it!!!

I do wonder if it's about the "money" for some folks who get so upset. I hate to sound like the wet blanket, but there just isn't that much money in photographing dolls. And it does seem to me, that those who take stellar doll images are already working in the medium, for the most part!

I cannot tell you how much I would love to work with you and Mat right now.
:( I hope hope hope you're going to be taking some images - especially nudes, and some with the boy. If you two have any questions or want ideas/lighting/pose suggestions - just ask!!!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]ashbet
2008-04-20 06:19 pm UTC (link)
I love that first image, wow -- the second is lovely, too!

I have mixed feelings -- I've had photographs OF ME stolen and reposted without credit (to me or to the photographer), and I've had a creepy 16-year-old post a profile on VampireFreaks.com using my images (and little snippets of my bio), which was a creepy Single White Female-ish feeling. I've also had my art stolen and reposted as someone else's work. This bothers me a LOT.

I don't care if someone hotlinks to my images (pictures of me, or pictures taken/drawn by me), or if someone reposts them WITH ATTRIBUTION -- I'm uncomfortable when my work and my likeness are being misrepresented as belonging to someone else.

I do draw a distinction between finding something online and saying "Hey, check out this neat image I came across!" and falsely saying "Look what I MADE" -- the first is natural and helps foster the dissemination of information and art, the second is outright theft and dishonesty.

Regarding the Chinese book of stolen images -- if the publishers had linked to the sites of the image originators on their LiveJournals or a non-pay website, or even posted images without attribution if they genuinely didn't know where they came from (they obviously did, btw, text interviews were lifted as well as images), that would be one thing . . . but they printed it up and are selling it FOR PROFIT, and that's thievery, and it's wrong. They're making money off someone else's hard work, and I have a serious ethical problem with that.

Interesting question on where to draw the line, though, it's a fascinating subject for both legal scholars and laypeople these days!

-- A <3

P.S. Did you see this? Eeeeee!!!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 06:28 pm UTC (link)
Thanks, A.k

Okay, you're just adding to the questions here! Heh. I'm looking for hard answers about why this is so deeply concerning to people. You're saying its the creeps - yes, I agree with that and keep my personal image-posting to a minimum, but my take on that sort of theft is that you really can't to much about creepy people. You're also saying it's thievery - but why is this so off-putting? People really aren't profiting majorly off of images they've found online, and most of those images really aren't capable of making the "owner" profit regardless or if they are then they shouldn't be posted publically, right? I guess that's where I'm most confused - it does sound as though people are worried about their images being stolen for profit by the thief....but that's such a rare thing and I'm not seeing how those folks think their images would be making them money....

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]ashbet, 2008-04-20 06:42 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 06:48 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]whitemunin
2008-04-20 06:35 pm UTC (link)
Neil Gaiman and John Scalzi had some very interesting things to say about this kind of stuff. If you haven't read them, I'll hunt down the links and fire them off to you.

BTW, that B&W you posted is just breathtaking. I've stopped several times while typing this response to scroll up and stare at it in awe.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 06:38 pm UTC (link)
Heya, D - thanks! I love that image, too!!!

I would be very interested in seeing those links. Bearing in mind that professional....artists/writers do have a slightly different and usually far more legal take on theft than amatuer writers and artists!

Hope you're doing well, sweets!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]dollseye
2008-04-20 06:59 pm UTC (link)
For me, it depends who's swiped the image, what the context is that its being used in and which image it is. I'm more possessive over some of my images than I am over others. The ones I feel most for, I tend not to upload to the internet, they get printed large and go into my portfolio.

I agree with you about the low-res part. A compressed image uploaded at 72dpi looks very broken up and rough when it's printed. That's how I know when students in my classes have taken the easy route and used something off the internet. It's too easy to do that, and it looks like crap.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 07:29 pm UTC (link)
So, for you, J, it's just the theft itself that burns you up? The idea/fact that someone has stolen from you?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]dollseye, 2008-04-20 07:59 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]withinity
2008-04-20 07:23 pm UTC (link)
It doesn't bother me if people post my images in blogs - even hotlinked - with credit given. I take that as a compliment and never mind when people do that. If credit isn't given, I politely ask that the person credit me. This has never been a problem that I can remember, usually the 'thieves' are apologetic. But even if it's just 'I found this photo online somewhere', it wouldn't bother me much. I sometimes feel people are over-protective of things like auction photos. I certainly have lots of pictures saved and I don't care who's saved mine.

I get extremely annoyed when people use my images in their own icons or web graphics. And in those cases, sometimes the person is nice about it and sometimes not, because they feel they've changed my image enough that it's now their own work. I feel very differently! I remember once someone had my photo of my doll as an LJ icon and had an attitude with me when I pointed out it was my work. I don't want my pictures photoshopped with song lyrics pasted over, that wasn't my intention, I don't want my work altered, and that DOES make me angry. Especially if used on personal sites or blogs, because it's as if the person is saying, 'this is what I'm about, this is me' and it's not. I've even had someone photoshop my image a little and then say it was her work, with warnings to others not to steal it.

I don't feel that my images are necessarily special, but if some company did want to use my images on their products, then I think they ought to be paying me for them. I have an art degree that cost ME money, and training I've paid for that I used as a basis for making my living for years. It is not ok for other people to try to make a living off my work, not if I get nothing from it. If they thought my pictures were good, they can help pay off my student loans.

It's not so much the actual potential loss of income that bothers me, which as you know would be tiny in any case. It's more the idea that images are so worthless that one never need pay for them. That art, photography or design is something not meant to be done for money, is not a profession, is not meant to be a way of making a living. That the creator of the image is so inconsequential as to not be consulted about how it is re/contextualized or presented.

With products like tshirts, bags, buttons whatever - I particularly do not make images for use on those things. I don't like to see artwork on those types of items, like the junk sold in museum giftshops. The Mona Lisa on a tie, napkins with Van Gogh sunflowers... I hate it. It waters down and decontextualizes the work, and I feel it's not respectful of the artist's intent. I would be disgusted if my own images were used for that sort of purpose. I would gladly design coffee mugs if someone asked me to, but I would hate to see my images stolen and put on coffee mugs, if that makes sense.


(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]zagzagael
2008-04-20 07:32 pm UTC (link)
Fair enough - although I feel like I'm still not "hearing" answers other than, "I just don't like it. It's theft and that's not cool." And those ARE acceptable answers. No one likes to be ripped off, absolutely! But the majority of the answers I'm getting here are more moral in tone than about rights and money, so perhaps that really is where the outrage is coming from - emotionally?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]withinity, 2008-04-20 09:09 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:15 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]milk_eye
2008-04-20 07:55 pm UTC (link)
What I say here applies solely to my own doll photos - not on art in general or images of individuals, or anyone else's photos. All just my personal opinion, mind. No offense is meant to anyone else.

Like you, the idea of people posting my images or, say, making vinyl purses in China out of them doesn't bother me. When I first started photographing my dolls I did use watermarks, but if I'm honest with myself I only did so because it seemed the thing to do...it wasn't because I was actually frightened of someone taking my images. I've run across both ends of the spectrum: artists that don't watermark or seem in the least bit bothered by people right-clicking their images, and artists who jealously do everything in their power to prevent anyone saving their images, including removing photos a few days after posting them online to "avoid anyone copying" them.

And so, hypothetically, if I like both artists' work and want to post about how brilliant they are on my blog, guess which one I'm going to actually post about? I'd be too terrified of the crapstorm I may have to endure if I re-post any of the work from the second artists' group without permission and really, the idea of contacting each and every person who demands every small acknowledgment can get tiring, fast. I mean, people demanding credit for everything from creating a LJ icon to using their name or posting their Website or taking a photo where their car appears in the background...it seems to be getting out of hand a bit? A vast majority of people seem to get upset at just the merest whiff of creative infringement, be it copying images or stylistic influence. When I was younger I'll admit I got my knickers in a twist over that sort of thing, and I see a lot of it on DoA as well, in threads like "When is it alright to accuse someone of copying your doll/someone else's doll?" or "since you have that one i'm not going to get that one (friends sharing dolls)". Nowadays I do see the validity of the old adage "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". Really I do. (No doubt others would disagree and switch out flattery for stealing.) Perhaps I am just grossly out of touch?

The one place I would draw the line is in the circumstance of images being published and marketed as someone else's work. Pushing the credible boundaries of this idea, take for example if someone took all of my photos and compiled them in a book and then published said book as their own (or someone else's) work. That would make me very cross indeed. But posting my photos on blogs or other websites or slapping them on some school folder or Chinese lunchbox isn't going to rile me in the least. To my mind, at least they think enough of my photography to want to look at it as they eat their meal or sharpen their pencils, you know? Hey - free advertising, I say.

You're right...the monetary benefits of royalties from such things would amount to very little, if anything at all. At the end of the day, for me, if my photos please other people, then it's all good.

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:16 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]twoswallows
2008-04-20 09:28 pm UTC (link)
It's a good question, E!

If I really think deeply about this, I would only be upset if someone went and took a bunch of my photos and presented them as their own, as if they was part of their identity and their life. To actively deceive others into thinking that they did the work - that really bothers me. I don't like the idea of anyone padding their portfolio of creations with mine. It's about gain, really. The thought that someone might be lazy enough to pretend someone else's work is their own is deeply repugnant - so I suppose it's a moral issue (it's certainly not a monetary one). However, I don't actively worry about it because it's highly unlikely that anyone would want to "use" my work in this way!

Lack of credit doesn't bother me - if I notice it, I'll contact the person to ask if they'd like to put up a link, because then it makes it easy for viewers to find more of the same.

Icons and so on are a bit less simple, mainly because I have a rather large bone to pick with the so-called icon makers on livejournal who take copyrighted images, create an icon, and then claim that they have copyright over the image. I can't get over how stupid that is. (Sure, make an icon, but putting a few Photoshop filters over it doesn't suddenly make it copyrighted to them...) Anyway, theoretically I don't mind, but if I encountered any of the aforementioned crazy icon-makers I'd speak my mind.

"Copying", in terms of influences, isn't something I worry about. Yes, of course people do it to some extent. (Probably everyone does, to greater or lesser degrees.) However, unless they're actually cloning every detail of each outfit I make, or every aspect of every photo down to the last flyaway hair, I'm not worried. I'm secure enough in my own creations to know that if they're imitating, that's a good thing! I'd hope they'd branch off into their own style eventually, of course, because that's much more interesting for me as an audience.

To summarise: I think that education about politeness and use of images online is imperative, but I also think that persecuting an innocent blogger or website owner is silly. If their intention is to share an image that they enjoyed, then that's wonderful, and this is almost always the case, I think. That kind of sharing is part and parcel of what the internet is, and to try and stop it seems futile and rather self-serving. If you put it on the internet, you need to expect it to be shared.

If they were trying to make a direct commercial gain from my images, I would probably pursue the matter, but it would depend on the situation. Attempts at commercial gain are so incredibly rare, though, that I don't feel the need to protect myself, and as you mention, web image quality is not print.

The b&w image is absolutely breathtaking. It's the sort of thing I'd love on my wall! Gorgeous.

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]milk_eye, 2008-04-20 09:59 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:22 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]armeleia
2008-04-20 09:40 pm UTC (link)
This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately.

Someone once told me that in order to have a discussion, you must start by defining your terms. I mentally define "image theft" more akin to "art theft," as in taking and using someone's artistic, expressive creations without permission and without crediting the original artist. I don't include kids ganking my orchid photos that I took in Japan or the banal doodles that I post occasionally under this heading... I suppose it technically fits. But I consider those things to be more visual culture, or works with a small "w."

A lot of it comes down to what you are creating and why.

There are many parts of creating art, and many reasons why people do it. But I think that art is one of the deepest parts of ourselves - and I feel that many people create art as a way to reach out and find others like themselves. By someone else taking the work, they are essentially removing the artist from the picture. That's hard for an artist to deal with, I think, because then it's almost like they were never even part of the work... like maybe it was never even yours, even though you bore it from your own mind and hands. When that whole crazy freak out over the (inaccurate) Orphan Works project information came up.... it made me think a lot about the terminology. It's a fasinating analogy. It's like equating a piece of art with a child. And to be an orphan, your parents are dead, yeah? But what if your "child" was taken while you were still alive, and while she was still yours? Wouldn't there be very real pain to you as the parent? And what if, while you're grieving, other people are telling you "You're being selfish, if you hadn't wanted someone to take her, you shouldn't have ever let her out of the house. And besides, she's fine. Saw her last week. She's just got a new life without you."

Your kid, someone else's immortality. You may be happy that she's alive and well, but it doesn't make the loss hurt any less. And it doesn't make you stop wondering if it would be different if people knew she was yours...

I am firmly against art theft.

Another question for you, I suppose. You post fanfiction here occasionally, and you may not really are if it's stolen and spread around. But when you finish your novel, will that be different?

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:19 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]aimeekitty, 2008-04-21 01:52 am UTC (Expand)

[info]batchix
2008-04-20 09:51 pm UTC (link)
D and I make our living as artists... although this affects him more than me. It's extremely hard to find art jobs that pay anymore and often you're being paid crapola. D made $8 an hour for the first three years at GTM. They only bumped him to $12 the very last six months he was there after firing one of his friends. They paid their reps $2,000 a month starting plus commissions. The art department saw no kick backs, even for when they had to draw the art from scratch. The reasoning? "The reps find the jobs." Yes, I understand. But if the artists didn't make the art WHAT WOULD YOU SELL? Blank t shirts? You can argue that they could have found monkies to do the art for them and people would still pay for the crappy art(and many of the companies WANT crappy art), but a lot of the jobs would go else where if they felt like they weren't getting their monies worth.

People think they shouldn't have to pay for art. Why pay for something you can just rip off of for free? If all the companies can get their artwork for free, what will artists DO? I am NOT going to continue being an artist if I am not going to get paid for it. I'm going to go do something else... and I wouldn't feed the problem by posting it anymore.


Doing freelance on the side, you've got to get your work on-line somewhere so that people will want to hire you for work. Many of the artists who's work they're stealing, that's food out of their mouths. That's their work out there without their name, which means that even though it gets seen, they aren't. No one will see that pencil box and go "I really like this art and I must hire this person to do work for me!" because they won't be able to call up the company and ask who did this artwork? No one will know... because it's stolen.

The best ways to combat the whole situation in my opinion are first of all make people aware, and second, don't add to the problem.

If someone is stealing images SAY SOMETHING. Even if you're not mad about it. Just point it out. That mass artbook in China I posted about? No, I can't do anything to the publisher(with his FAKE ISBN number)but I can post images of the cover and tell people not to buy it and not buy it myself.

The other is to not do it yourself and not allow the companies you work for to do it. I argued and argued with one of my employers to not rip off photos from other sources. In the end I refused to do an entire job because she wanted me to edit out a watermark and blow up someone's photo to a giant six foot print. She found someone else to do it instead, but I think I drove the point home as after that she did try to get permission first. At GTM dave refused to use artwork that was clearly lifted from other sources. His friend was fired because he refused to rip off another company's t-shirt design(and it was their design word for word).

If my artwork is something I'm not getting paid for, like fan work, I don't mind it getting redistributed so long as no one is selling it. If I can't make a buck at it, you can't either damn it! XD Same with my doll photos and my kissdolls. I like to see other people enjoy my artwork, it makes me feel happy. However it would bother me if people started selling my stuff without permission because I like having food in my mouth, thanks.

Same with it would bother me if people were passing off my artwork as their own. That would really make me mad.

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]batchix, 2008-04-20 09:51 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:28 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]batchix, 2008-04-21 12:23 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]aimeekitty, 2008-04-21 01:55 am UTC (Expand)

[info]gloryskies
2008-04-20 10:30 pm UTC (link)
I've never had a problem with anyone stealing my photographs or artwork, and I seriously doubt I ever will, but I imagine if I ever came across anything of mine posted somewhere without my permission I wouldn't be too upset about it. At least, as long as it was either credited, or the poster acquiesced when asked to credit me. If someone refuses to credit the artist, or feels that a little bit of editing, such as making the image an lj icon, somehow makes it completely their own, I find that pretty appalling. And, anyway, my feelings would probably vary depending on what the image was being used for.

Also, I have to personally disagree that illustrators don't have more at stake when they're drawings are lifted than when a photographer's photos are. For me, at least, it takes hours of patience and hard work to produce even a halfway decent drawing, whereas most of the time all one of my photographs takes is the right circumstances, a little bit of a fiddling in photoshop, and a fairly nice camera. It did take a fair amount of practice to develop my skills with a camera, but it's ridiculously less practice than I've put into art. And yet I feel like my photography is at a much higher skill level than my art is.

Haha, sorry. I went off on a bit of a tangent there...

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:35 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]gloryskies, 2008-04-20 10:54 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]stardustasylum
2008-04-20 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Hmm...I guess I feel that when I'm sharing my work, it's just that. When I share a sandwich with my friend, that doesn't mean I'm letting my friend take the whole sandwich with her to eat at her leisure. I'm inviting her to share not only the sandwich, but my time and the fact that I made it. For her to enjoy, but not for her to take.

I am not a visual artist (at all!!), though I wish with all my heart I was. The only thing I can paint with is my words, and words are very very easily stolen. I've experienced this sort of artistic theft several times, and each time, I've considered why it hurt. The first time, I was 16 years old and someone had taken my Vampire Chronicles fanfic and just changed the protagonists' names to post her own story. Now, why did this hurt? I had indeed posted it online and heck, the characters I had been writing with weren't even mine. Bigger 'and heck,' I didn't even attach my real name, just the pseudonym "Wraith" and a disclaimer that the characters weren't mine. But you see, I did say they weren't mine. But the rest was. The story woven around those names that I acknowledged weren't mine was mine. I know there are people who would tell me I shouldn't have posted it online if I didn't want it taken.

Another even more painful time I was a 21 year old grad student. I wrote a fantastic paper on fop culture in the 18th century...and a year later, the teacher I handed it in to wrote a book using all my research and ideas. I was devastated and betrayed...but in this case, what could I have done? Not handed in the paper?

I believe that artists are possessive (or may be possessive) because there are so few things in this world that we can claim true ownership of. Even my figurative sandwich earlier on, made by my hands, a unique selection of veggies and meats, is not 'mine.' I didn't make the bread, grow the vegetables...heck, I didn't create those vegetables. But my stories, my poems...they are a piece of me. My own creation. And when someone takes those things, I'm losing one of the only things I can truly call mine.

For these reasons, I am exceedingly careful in what I put online. Often, the written pieces I do post in my blog were written for that purpose...almost as a buffer, I'm putting up pieces I know may get taken. They're not my golden, my best. I can't take that chance right now.

I'm willing to share. But I'm a little more clingy about letting someone take little pieces of my soul away.

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:41 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]stardustasylum, 2008-04-20 11:10 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 11:40 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]armeleia
2008-04-20 10:37 pm UTC (link)
You say that your work is protected, but is it? If someone republished your for-pay in another country, could you REALLY do anything? Technically, you could probably sue or make a big deal... but the expense and logistics would probably be overwhelming, and it might end up being something that you would just have to let go. That's the case with many artists. Technically, works are copyright from the moment they are created in fixed form... so technically, a stolen doodle is as protected as your for-pay work.

Maybe I also feel differently because my views of a universal consciousness differ from yours. There are certain things that are definitely universal among all people... and while they may be beautiful truths, they may not necessarily be art unto themselves. And my way of refining that consciousness is mine, based on the fact that I am a unique individual and I have a discrete soul.

Art, real Art with a large 'A', is a distillation of the soul. And if you think your soul is unique, shining and distinct, then these tangible pieces are as well.

I wouldn't put the stolen work on par with fanfiction - the stolen works are original pieces, not derivative works. You could probably argue that there is no such thing as a piece of art that is not derivative of something, but it would be harder to claim that Harry Potter fanfiction is a truly 100% original creation.

And perhaps these artist shouldn't be sharing. But unfortunately, many of us will never be famous enough to publish our own work in a real book... or have a showing at a real gallery. Should we not share anywhere then?

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 10:48 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]armeleia, 2008-04-20 11:11 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-20 11:37 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]keiki_boys
2008-04-21 01:22 am UTC (link)
Let's see, I think the saying is.

All art is theft.

Great art is grand theft.

My answer is, I really don't care. I've made money on my art and I've had it taken and I've given it away, it's all fine. No good or bad in it, just the way it is.

I don't friends lock my posts to protect my pictures or drawings, but to protect my temper. Or maybe protect my friends from my temper. *g*

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-21 01:52 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]keiki_boys, 2008-04-21 05:01 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]thistle_verse
2008-04-21 01:51 am UTC (link)
This is a really interesting topic and there a lot of fascinating replies. I'm not a visual artist, so I can't claim to really "know" how it would feel to have an image "stolen." I generally think of images, once they're put out into the world (and *willingly* put out there!) to be public domain. I mean, someone can capture me in a photo stroll and sell that as art. I don't "own" my own image...how could I say I own an image I take and release for others to view? I don't know. I understand about people not wanting someone to steal their art as their own and make money the original artist didn't get. I just don't know quite how to define boundaries when it comes to an image.

As for writing, if I post it online I willingly allow that someone is going to take something from that work. I have an old fanfic floating around in Russian somewhere...that's pretty crazy. Sure, someone might totally rip it off and say it's theirs. I might feel a sting, but...it's fanfiction. I wouldn't post something online and publicly like that if I felt like protecting it, if I wanted to market it somehow. I do truly believe that to be the bottom line. I wouldn't lay my iPod on the hood of my car and yell, "Hey, everyone! Don't steal this while I'm in the store, ok?"




Edited at 2008-04-21 01:53 am UTC

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-21 01:51 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]doll_paparazzi
2008-04-21 05:37 am UTC (link)
I researched the "copywrite" of the dolls issue you brought up. My lawyer found this all out for me. And as a trademarked product, there is a lot more flexibilty as far as using their products like we are. It's a LOT more technical and I have about 30 or so pages that cover this issue that is in legaleze... but basically it comes down to what you said isn't a concern unless you say a Volks doll was actually made by you. If you are taking pictures of your doll and saying that it is a Volks doll, then you are honky-dorrie. HEH. :) Or so my lawyer said. They could be wrong, of course, but we researched this because of the projects we both were working on and neither of us wanted to get our butts sued over (and neither of us got sued).

I have had my work stolen. And, like Jesse, it depends on what it is and WHAT it was used for. I honestly do not want any of my images taken for anything that I don't believe in personally and I don't want to be associated with it.

I understand that the moment I post my images online that I am pretty much releasing my hold on that. However, I do hope that some copywrite laws keep into effect long enough that I can at least fall back on it.

Watermarks can get removed, which is why I don't put them on anymore. They are a joke to me now. I see them on shots and think, whatever. If someone really wants something, they will grab it and PS the name right off.

I know you say you don't care here, Zag... but what if you found one of you images on a massive Cocoa Cola campaign? Those photographers don't get paid a few dollars, they get paid THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of dollars (I'm pretty sure they get paid in the $10,000-$40,000 per campaign depending on who they are... I know Victoria's Secret photographer's usually get paid $80,000-100,000 per shoot). Most National Magazines pay $300-$700 per shot (roughly), and they go from there. Newspapers are about that as well (I have a friend that shoots for SF Post and NY Times). Full page covers depending on the magazine are in the thousands. I don't know about you, but I would be hard pressed to turn away that sort of money. And I know several of my friends are painters and professional artists who would literally starve without some of these protections.

Without laws protecting artists, corporations can go through Flickr, Yahoo, photobucket, My Space... anywhere and just pick off images without any signature (or just pick off ones and remove signatures really... who will know?). And they could say, Oh, well I couldn't FIND the artist, so it's a orphan image. They would never have to hire another photographer or artist again. Why bother when they can get it for free?

Or even better yet, how about one of your images taken for political party or a group that directly opposes your view point? I'm not sure how you feel about these... I'm just randomly throwing these out to make you think: abortion, or the Repulican Party, or legalization of prayer in schools... but it could be a gambit of things. Just think the absolute opposite of what you believe and hold dear to you, and someone could take maybe one of your angles shots... and if there was no law protecting you, they could do it with no real issues, make money or make their point, and then you would have no recourse.

So, my view is that copyright laws need to be in place to protect artists. Whether you use it or not is up to you. But to not have them around or allow ones that promote image theft is like promoting copyright theft of prose. That's the next step there too. When is anyone's work protected?

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-21 01:49 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]doll_paparazzi, 2008-04-21 03:49 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]jenovan
2008-04-21 12:56 pm UTC (link)
I think, as some others have said, for me the concern definitely isn't of potential money lost, but of having someone else claim my work as their own. Especially since -- and I don't think I've seen this brought up yet -- for me, not only are the physical shells of the dolls mine, the personalities and characters they portray are mine too... so if someone else were to try to take credit for them, it's like they're stealing my photography AND my writing. My dismay at that would be purely emotional... And that's not quite the same as some company in HK or something grabbing a photo and making a sticker out of it. That would kind of suck, but at the same time, that's just an image... that's not some individual saying "this doll is mine." Maybe it's not logical, but hey... ;)

On the other hand, if people want to share or even hotlink my images, as long as they give me credit or a linkback, I'm fine with that. Sometimes it's exposure to an audience I could probably never reach on my own, like a foreign language blog. :P That's part of why I put watermarks on my pics -- not as a "DO NOT TAKE" so much as a "here's who and where I am if you want to see more".

Slight tangent as I think a bit more -- I think a lot of doll owners have a lot of themselves invested in their dolls in visible and invisible ways, and when images are "stolen" or dolls are "copied", people feel like some portions of themselves are being taken. It may come across as silly (or groundless, in some of these cases of "copying"...) to someone with an outside perspective, but it seems to really hit a nerve with the person who feels they're being "ripped off"...

(Reply to this)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zagzagael, 2008-04-21 01:50 pm UTC (Expand)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…