Please enforce stronger rules against art theft
Buttercheese
Member Posts: 3,766
Hi. It would be nice if there could be a stronger enforcement against art theft on these forums.
It really isn't that hard to put a bloody link to the image source and the name of the artist next to a picture.
This fandom has little to no respect for portrait artists and I honestly feel like you, Beamdog,
should step in and teach the folks here some manners.
Please do something, there are enough artists who hate the Baldur's Gate fandom already.
_________________________________
PS: I was a tad bit overemotional when I started this thread yesterday and ended up being a tad bit to agressive/ insulting on a few accords. I am not gonna go in ahead and edit the posts in question (to avoid confusing anyone), so I am putting a warning here instead. Please excuse me, this has been a hot button topic for me for a long time now. I am trying to keep things more grounded and civil as I go on now.
Also, some useful links I would like to put here for all you TL;DR folks:
- About sharing other people's art/ How to properly source
- About using and modifying other people's works
- Can I use that picture?
It really isn't that hard to put a bloody link to the image source and the name of the artist next to a picture.
This fandom has little to no respect for portrait artists and I honestly feel like you, Beamdog,
should step in and teach the folks here some manners.
Please do something, there are enough artists who hate the Baldur's Gate fandom already.
_________________________________
PS: I was a tad bit overemotional when I started this thread yesterday and ended up being a tad bit to agressive/ insulting on a few accords. I am not gonna go in ahead and edit the posts in question (to avoid confusing anyone), so I am putting a warning here instead. Please excuse me, this has been a hot button topic for me for a long time now. I am trying to keep things more grounded and civil as I go on now.
Also, some useful links I would like to put here for all you TL;DR folks:
- About sharing other people's art/ How to properly source
- About using and modifying other people's works
- Can I use that picture?
Post edited by Buttercheese on
4
Comments
Credit has to be always given when credit is due and permission needs to be aquired beforehand if the image is modified and/or used in a mod.
This fandom has an absolutely terrible habit of taking all those artists for granted. Too many people here think they somehow have the right to use an artwork simply because it exits. And the worst part is, the different forums, this one included enable and even literally promote that behavior.
This needs to stop, like, yesterday.
I get that enforcing this would be quite a bit of work. But something needs to change.
(Avatars are imo usually a-okay, I never heard of an artist complaining someone using a picture as their forum avatar.)
@Grond0 and anyone wondering about "use"
@Buttercheese isn't talking about your avatar or what portrait you use in your game at home. Nobody ever cared about avatars and what happens on your computer is your own business. She's referring to mods with characters using portraits or worse, portrait packs. The latter is particularly problematic because it's often difficult to often properly give credit to the artists involved.
At the moment I'm inclined to accept the above description of the problem by @Kurona rather than extending that to personal use (I think dealing with the latter would anyway cause potential difficulties with the US concept of fair use of copyrighted material). I can see why giving credit could be a problem and would have expected modders to get round that by asking permission in advance to use any artwork.
First - before enforcing any rules, you should define art theft. I can agree that art theft is definitely when one is taking someone's artwork and clam it to be his/her. But, there are aso circumstances in which one is not crediting the original artist for reason.
Second - and that would be the second point. Sometimes regardless of honest intantion, one is unable to find original artist. Sometimes one has downloaded entire portrait pack, with hundreds of these, which also creater problems with tracking down the original artist.
What are your proposition then? Warnings/bans for users? Preventing posting screenshots in the playthrought threads, if OP doesn't know the original artist? In that case, sticking only in-game portraits? But wait, these also have original artists, so I guess users should credit them as well. Maybe people who are unable to credit properly shouldn't post screenshots at all?
The issue is not black and white, and rules are often blind to circumstances and serve hindering purpose. So, I suggest you to define what would be considered art theft and what not, adress the problem with tracking original artists and clearly state how rules you propose would be enforcered. This is important, because poorly made rule will not only don't do any favors to artist, but also won't do any facours to community, as labeling people as art thieves isn't the best way to mantain healthy community.
I actually wrote to full articles on the topic almost two years ago,
I think those should clear things up (let me know if any questions remain afterwards.)
About sharing other people's art/ How to properly source
About using and modifying other people's works
As for how exactly the modertators/admins should fare with people who break these potential rules, is up to debate. From what I observed here in the past years, a lot of rules are enforced with varying strength and on a case to case basis, so it would probably be best to go with this about the same as well.
Thank you for the links. Why don't you edit your first post so that it would contain those two links? That would be helpful.
There is remaing question however. How are you propose it to be enforced on this forums? You know, punishments etc. ?
Second, we've recieved a specific complaint from artists reagarding the use of artwork in one of the threads here.
I think it's a bit harsh to say that this fandom has little to no respect for portrait artists. There're numerous cases when users respect artists and source all the artwork, and even get straight permission from artists. And there're certain cases of violations, which shoud be addressed.
The moderation team will ensure the complaint we've recieved will be resolved.
When I did my RPG-Portraits project a few years ago (where I'd cooporate with different artists to create portrait packs with their art; I canned the project after a while because it was too much work) a good chunk of them refused my proposal specifically because it was for the BG modding community, with which they had art theft problems in the past.
Almost daily over at tumblr I see artists complaining about their art getting reposted on forums and image boards without them being credited (this is not BG fandom specific, but in general).
And then you have ignorant comments like this: If nothing changes I will personally report every uncredited and stolen piece of art to the artists in question I spot here in the future. The artists have every right to know about what is happening to their work. So far I kept everything under the radar for the sake of the forum peace and because I prefer giving people the benefit of the doubt. But I am just growing sick of it both for the artists' and the community's sake.
Nobody wins in this. Artists are getting disenfrachised and the community is growing an ever shittier reputation. As someone who plays on both teams, let me assure you that we both lose. If we, as a community, can proof to artists that we respect their work, more of them will be willing to work with us. So putting in the few extra minutes of writing down proper credits is better for all of us in the long run.
___________________________________
As a side note I want to add that I am well aware that this disrespectful behavior is a general problem on all of the internet and not just with the BG (modding) community specifically. But change has to start somewhere.
___________________________________
PS: Also, having official permission to use an artwork may result in endorsement of a mod from their site. Yet another reason to ask.
2. No Advertisement.
This Site is not to be used to advertise or distribute products, services or copyrighted material.Don’t post links to, attach to a post, or post: warez, illegal software, illegal copies of books, substantial portions of copyrighted texts, or anything of the sort. This is not limited to copyrighted published material, but also to images that must be purchased, and anything else being illegally distributed. If you possess verifiable consent of the owner of copyrighted content, you may post the allowed content (within the limits of the content rules).
Also, when you report something using the Flag feature, all the moderation team sees it and thus the chances of the best possible solution to an issue increase.
I have also used other people's art on a GUI mod, but in that case I have shared the link to the original artist's deviantart page . I 've also used modifications from the original Beamdog artworks, even though I do not know the artist I make it clear that beamdog owns its rights.
Should I do anything more than that?
At least now I can report away without feeling bad about it anymore :V
You might wanna make this clearer though, evidently a lot of people are not aware of this.
I'm afraid I don't believe the application of copyright is as straight-forward as you suggest - for instance I've already referred to the principle of 'fair use' in an earlier post - and I don't think that the sort of use I've made of images (for screenshots that include a tiny character portrait as in the following) would generally be legally actionable (certainly not in the US).
I'm also not sure you appreciate the dynamics of the sort of no-reload documented runs I and others have been doing for a good many years. The character portrait used above is one of my favorites and will have been included in thousands of screenshots over time. Putting a source next to all those (even if I were able to determine the original source of all portraits, which in many cases would be doubtful) would take additional time, but more importantly than that the constant repetition would also be annoying for the reader - trying to avoid too much repetition is a perennial issue when you're describing doing something you've done many hundreds of times before
What @Buttercheese wanted to say is that people who share an art without crediting an artist and its source are wrong. Like releasing portrait packs without crediting artists. Or just posting a portrait without any links and/or mention of its artist just because you find this portrait cool.
When you post pics of your BG playthrough, you don't share an art in that sense. You share with other people a story about your playthrough - and yes, you use a custom portrait for that playthrough, but you don't upload this portrait separately. Though, it's been a good custom when a person posting about their playthrough in the first post mention who is the artist of the portrait they are using.
As mentioned I don't know who made certain portraits. For example, I've used google and there's a way to search for free images there. Do I now have a link to all the artwork that was found that way today? No I don't.
So I'm evaluating if there is a way ahead for my mod or if it is dead.
I've already spent hundreds of hours coding and working on my portrait mod. Am I willing go back to square one and sink another similar amount of time in the joyless pursuit of tracking down people and go back and forth and explain everything if they even respond? I enjoyed the creative part of making a mod and was willing to work for free for that to create. Trying to convince people and barter back and forth, that's something else - no creation or imagination there. I don't get paid for this.
As a fan of the game, I wanted to provide something greater than the sum of it's parts to the community to enhance their game.
So how do I move forward? At the moment, I think a way forward could be to start a new project and crowdsource through the community and request new portrait submissions to the mod. I don't know if the mod would ever be done that way considering there are thousands of portraits needed. Maybe I could request help tracking down artists, because I certainly don't have the time to track them all down myself I'd need help. According to the rules quoted by Buttercheese, you must do more than link to the deviantart page, you have to contact the artist and if they are still alive and if you can get them to respond to you then you have to get their permission otherwise you'd have to take down your GUI mod.
I did not quote it as a personal insult but because it was the closest comment of that kind at hand.
Most people are ignorant about this topic. If it were just a select few people I wouldn't have bothered making an entire topic about adressing the community as a whole. And therein lies the folly: Art is not free just because it's on Google.
Assuming that is like saying that you are allowed to take the art from a museum with you just because you paid the entrance fee to see it.
If you wanna find art that is free to use you have to do this:
1. Click [Tools]
2. Click [More Tools]
3. Click [Labled for noncommercial reuse with modification] Well, good for you. You still stole art for it. Yes, you do. You have google, you have the image. Here's what you do, using one of the portraits from your mod as an example:
1. Go to Google image search
2. Click the camera button
3. Go to the upload image tag
4. Upload the image
5. Check the links in question till you find the right one.
(Sometimes you have to dig through a number of links.)
Aaaaand there it is:
Pillars of Eternity: Vigo Iason by coupleofkooks
This took literally 20 seconds. Which is why I am so bloody mad about all this.
If you hadn't stolen the art it would have never come to this.
This one is on you. Do not dare to paint yourself as the victim here.
All you would have had to do was ask the artists for permission, I already spoke with some of them about it and put in a good word for you. Told them that you probably didn't know better. Some of them even agreed on letting you use the art if you give proper credit.
I like the concept of this mod very much. I'd be willing to help you track down all the artists in questions and help you find new portraits to use (I am good at this stuff).
But do not claim that you are in the right here. It's really simple, I do it all the time.
You put together a standart message where you explain what exactly you want to do with the artwork in question, promise them to give proper credit, yada yada, and simply switch out the name every time.
I can write that stock message for you if you want. Neither do the artists you stole from. Again, you screwed this one up, you stole from other people for this. Being an artist is a thankless job already and actions like these just make it worse. I'd gladly help. You could have just asked around before you made the mod, I am sure plenty people would have wanted to help out.
- Portraits Portraits Everywhere (for BG1EE, SOD, BG2EE, IWDEE, EET)
- Artaport 3.1
- PaintBG for all BG platforms
- The Picture Standard
- Isandir's Portrait Pack
- Continous Viconia Appearance for BG1EE, BG2EE, SOD and EET
Following @Buttercheese arguments: Which one of these (if any) are OK to use?I'll also point out that often you can't just stop at finding the "source" on a site like DeviantArt. As an example, a few days ago, in the (now locked) Minor NPC Portraits for BGEE thread, eight possible replacements for a child's portrait were posted (with DeviantArt sources). However, three of these digital paintings (e-paintings?) were heavily based on commercial photographs, but none of the DeviantArt sources accurately cited the original photographs (one cited a dead fan blog as the "source" and the other two were completely silent on giving any credit at all for the original photographs). Since the digital portraits were very likely derivative works themselves, I doubt the artists have legal standing to grant permission to reuse.
EDIT: I am not trying to impugn anyone here. There was no way to know that the artists on DeviantArt weren't citing their sources accurately without digging. I was initially struck by how much one image looked in the same style as a famous photograph. After a bit of searching it turned out the digital portrait used another photograph by the same person as its base, hence the style similarity.
I believe there is a difference both morally and legally between the sort of personal use which I'm making of art and commercial or quasi-commercial (for instance in modding) use. I think that view is widely shared by other posters and there are several examples of that distinction being made by others in this thread - and you have not challenged those. Your responses to me specifically however suggest that you do not think there is a difference. I would also note that even in the earlier posts you've done on this issue (and linked in this thread) you haven't accepted this distinction and therefore it does seem likely to me that you are in fact advocating the strict interpretation on copyright acknowledgement suggested by your responses to me.
If I'm wrong about your position and your comments to me simply represent a personality clash then please clarify your position and let's move on. If I'm correct about your position I would just note that I don't think that strict interpretation would be supported by most forum posters - and taking that approach may have the effect of making it harder to get agreement even on those copyright issues where there is more common ground.
So, to make it short. What Cheese said. If someone's extra few minutes spent on searching for sources or linking them is more valuable than artist's time spent on making art, then let's just stop making and posting art for free. Let's leave art-making to companies with legions of lawyers who will sue anyone's ass off with ease. Except for them, everybody loses.
By the way the same principle applies to any other copyrighted material such as audio and video, for instance.
Anyway do not try to confront the person breaking the rule yourself. Flag the post and let the moderating team deal with it. This applies to ANY kind of Forum Rule violation.
Assuming @Etamin has notified @artastrophe, Artaport should be ok. Artastrophe's reuse permission statement is fairly liberal: Isandir's Portrait Pack - I assume so. It consists of portraits by @Isandir.
Continuous Viconia - All the images are based on Beamdog/WoTC owned images, but I don't know if the those who created the edited versions have given permission. Certainly, @smeagolheart has permission to use the one Viconia edit I made that is in it (which was really minor, considering my feeble skills).
PPE and Picture Standard - probably not.
Yeah, I know about this. They published this statement sometime last year, if I remember correctly.
I think it is bs. Unless someone can come up with better terminology I am left to call it theft.
(I would also like to mention that dA has a imo sub-par policy on art theft in general, you always have to file a DMCA when you see someone stole your art which includes having to give them your phone number and what not.) But alas, that is DeviantArt and they are not the end-all-be-all on these matters. Yeah, but in that case the fault is with the artist, not with the person who made the mod.
This is why it's important to ask ahead, to make sure that the artist in question actually has the full rights to allow the picture to be re-used.
I myself have found myself rather often in the situation were I would have loved to allow someone to use one of my pictures but I had to decline because the piece in question was a commission and/or included a (for the lack of a better term) "non-public character" I didn't own.
Also, but I am not entirely sure of this so please don't quote me on that, I do believe different laws apply if the painting is just based on the photograph instead of actually including the photograph itself.