Yup. I thought it was pretty nuts too. That’s why I wrote about this. Thanks for the feedback Jolie!
I think it’s a shame!!!
Kara- great article
As an artist and instructor I have many photographic images and video clips from my instructional DVDs “out there”… That’s the point, they are floating around- I post many of them myself, and others are posted by artists with an interest in what I am doing.
My websites/videos do hold my copywrite, and “all rights reserved”… and so I am always happy to have a quick email from some one that would like to post/repost an image of my work or one of my video clips- This is a courtesy that will keep all parties happy (giving the artist an opportunity to reply prior to posting/writing about can save you time too).
I love to share information on what I do, and how I do it— I do understand that some folks have a different take on it…
but I truly appreciate when another artist takes the time to look into my work with interest and enthusiasm and want to share it.
Thanks for all the feedback. Jolie, you read it right. I was shocked when this happened, that’s why I wanted to write about it. Cari, it was your trailer that introduced us and now I’m hooked on learning from you! You are a true leader in “sharing” in this encaustic world, and you “get” this internets thing. ;0)
Thanks Kara for sharing your story with us and also for giving us some strategies to hopefully keep something like this from happening to us. In fact your article motivated me after years of inaction and legal murkiness, to finally get off my slacker tail-feathers and place a Creative Commons License on this particular site [If you’re interested you can check it out in all of its legal mumbo-jumbo glory in the footer below]
I think in the end, you’re right that it’s all about communication. Everyone has their own opinion about what’s okay and what’s not okay to do with their content, so it’s important to spell it out exactly what’s acceptable to you when it comes to sharing your stuff online. Now you’ll still occasionally run into one of these people, like you did, who for whatever reason thought he had an expectation of privacy at a televised public event. It happens, and as you said, you sometimes just have to shake your head in disbelief and move on.
Thanks again Kara for a great post! :)
“Do not post anything that is the creative property of another artist without their permission. Otherwise unassuming artists (like me) will unknowingly link to it and hold it in high regard.”
I too would also have assumed that a vid posted by PBS would be fair to use, but I can see where the cease and desist letter is legitimate. Very curious–Aren’t you doing exactly what you’ve said NOT to do by sharing another artist’s photograph at the top of this page? Did she give you permission to do so? Is everything on Flicker free to use as long as you credit?
Hi Allison! I think I can answer this for Kara because I was actually the one who chose to use this particular image for the post.
Mae’s image was released under a Creative Commons Attribution license which gives anyone permission to share, copy, or distribute that particular image as long as the original author is credited.
To answer your question. Every image posted on Flickr is NOT fair game for people to share online despite what a lot of people seem to think. The image has to specifically have a Creative Commons License attached to it, and every Creative Commons license is not the same. This particular image was released under an attribution license, but there are several different types, which each have their own unique set of permissions and restrictions.
If you are interested in sharing your creative content online (or someone else’s) I would really encourage you to check out our Creative Commons License video that explains the basics and gives you all of the resources you’ll need to get started. Unfortunately, because of incidents like what Kara recently went through, many websites won’t even consider publishing anyone else’s content (images, articles, etc…) anymore unless they have a Creative Commons License posted.
As Kara mentions in her article, you want to be clear exactly what you do and do not want people to do online with your creative content. If there is any confusion about what you will or will not allow, or if you force people to contact you each time they want to use your content, you’re probably going to end up missing out on a lot of opportunities.
You didn’t ask Mae’s permission for that photo.
You’re right Jenna, I didn’t specifically ask Mae’s permission to use that image, but then again that’s the whole point of someone putting a creative commons license on their work in the first place.
If you go to the original image page, you’ll see that this image has been released under a Creative Commons Attribution License which means that she has already given us permission to share, copy, and distribute this image online as long as we give her credit.
That’s the beauty of having a Creative Commons license on your website/content because it encourages people to (legally) share your work. Honestly, if this image didn’t already have a CC license on it, I simply would have moved on and found a different image by someone else who did. Sure, I love this particular image, but if it didn’t have a CC license attached to it, I probably wouldn’t have used it. There are simply too many other creators out there who WANT their work to be shared to bother using people’s images where you’re unsure.
Now if Mae contacts us and tells me that she would rather not have her image associated with this particular website, I would certainly honor her wishes and I would find a different image to use. The way I see it, this is a win-win situation because I get to use Mae’s beautiful image and she gets some free and well-deserved publicity for her work, which is what the online arts community is all about :)
This reads to me like the artist could not cope with his work being critiqued so pulled out the copyright card.
I would have done the same as you (apart from the writing an eloquent and engaging post bit). However, a part of me would have loved to have challenged this.
Thanks for your support, David.
What am I missing here? The information was posted by the “local PBS” station for public consumption, if the artist did not want this posted then he should never have had PBS record it. It is craziness that the lawyer went after you.