![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dawn_felagund posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
silwritersguildOver the past few months, various changes to our Site Etiquette and Terms of Service have been proposed and discussed. When the SWG moderators detect something missing or in need of revision, we mods discuss it first and draft a revision or addition to the existing Site Etiquette and ToS. This is then put before the members for discussion and comment.
The following changes have been made to the Site Etiquette and ToS:
Working Email Address Required. The following item has been added to the Terms of Service:
This FAQ has more information: What should I do if I forget my login or password? What should I do if the site won't allow me to register with my email address? What are the SWG's requirements for working email addresses?
Image Use on the Archive. The following revision has been made to the Author Etiquette to address the use of images on the archive:
This FAQ has more information: Can we include images in our stories? What are the guidelines for using images on SWG?
Important!! If you use images on your profile or in your stories (aside from banners, which are obviously made to be displayed), please review the image use rules in the FAQ link above and make sure you are using images legally and with proper credit given to the artist/rights holder. Thank you to those of you who have done this already.
Multiple Accounts and Pseuds. The following addition has been made to the Site Etiquette:
This FAQ has more information: Am I allowed to set up more than one account on the archive? What are the rules for pseud accounts?
The translated ToS have not yet been updated but should be within the next few days.
The following changes have been made to the Site Etiquette and ToS:
Working Email Address Required. The following item has been added to the Terms of Service:
Upon registering with our archive or any future site features that the SWG might offer, members will be expected to provide a working email address. If an email address is found to be not working, the account will be locked, and the member can contact the moderation team to have the account unlocked and email address updated. In the instance of mass registrations of invalid email addresses that do not appear to be intended for legitimate use of the site, or other suspicious activity, the SWG moderators reserve the right to delete these accounts. An account with any legitimate past or present activity (including but not limited to entry of information into the bio page, review activity, posting stories or podfics, or creating a Favorites list) will never be deleted under this rule.
This FAQ has more information: What should I do if I forget my login or password? What should I do if the site won't allow me to register with my email address? What are the SWG's requirements for working email addresses?
Image Use on the Archive. The following revision has been made to the Author Etiquette to address the use of images on the archive:
Please take care to properly reference any sources that you use in your writing. This includes direct quotes from Tolkien’s works, direct quotes or original source material that belongs to other authors, and secondary source material, such as song lyrics or books. Failure to do so constitutes plagiarism and is considered unprofessional and unethical. (View the SWG Plagiarism Policy for more information.)
In order to protect SWG from copyright infringement, it is important that you do not reproduce all or most of a copyrighted work on the site without permission from the copyright holder. As this group is home to writers and artists, it is important that we protect the rights of all writers and artists—and so protect ourselves.
Likewise, while we allow the use of images in certain areas of the archive, members who use images in their stories, profiles, reviews, and other areas of the site must be legally allowed to use the image, provide proper credit to the artist or photographer, and follow other archive policies related to image use. Members who want to use images are strongly encouraged to view the SWG Image Policy for more information.
This FAQ has more information: Can we include images in our stories? What are the guidelines for using images on SWG?
Important!! If you use images on your profile or in your stories (aside from banners, which are obviously made to be displayed), please review the image use rules in the FAQ link above and make sure you are using images legally and with proper credit given to the artist/rights holder. Thank you to those of you who have done this already.
Multiple Accounts and Pseuds. The following addition has been made to the Site Etiquette:
Each member is permitted to register for one account on the archive. The sole exception to this rule is the creation of a second "pseud" account that participates on the archive independently from the identity of the primary account. Anyone interested in setting up a pseud account should read the Pseud FAQ before doing so.
This FAQ has more information: Am I allowed to set up more than one account on the archive? What are the rules for pseud accounts?
The translated ToS have not yet been updated but should be within the next few days.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-10-30 07:15 pm (UTC)I have a couple of postings which contain photomanips of mainly clearly out of copyright pictures greatly altered (in the U.S.--do not know the international law on this). I have no freaking idea whether all of these individual pieces of amateurish digital art fit under the guidelines or not.
I tried to do some research last night and earlier today to double-check and I am not having much luck with unraveling the finer points of the legal stuff about making art using someone else's images. I understand plagiarism well enough! But am not really an artist.
Do the mods have a site they could recommend that would give some clear guidelines on using existing images to make art? I wasn't worried before, because in the majority of cases I am pretty sure they are safe, because the original was completed over 100 years ago. And most are usually substantially altered. (What about Andy Warhol's soup cans? or the Virgin of Guadalupe with someone else's Marilyn Monroe head? I doubt permission was involved in those. Not sure how that works.) The photos I used, some of which are screen caps of obscure sources, altered, I am not entirely sure when the changes make them original artwork and they stop belonging to the photographer or film maker, if ever in the case of still probably copyrighted, although on the internet it is hard to know even what is copyrighted (much easier now with the Google image search)? Am I the only person with this question?
Some museums even try to claim rights over photos taken in their museums of things which clearly belong to history and never were under copyright. I am just not sharp on how copying applies to artwork--plagiarism of the written word has been drilled into my head since childhood. But other than trying to pass off copies of art as one's own and sell those as the original piece, I never thought about images and how that applied.
[This is why I never volunteered to make banners for SWG events--did not know for certain the legal restrictions on altered images and was never in the mood to do the necessary research to be sure I could make the absolute assertion that I was sure they were "clean and clear" so to speak. On signed artwork under my name, I felt a complaint--which would be highly unlikely to nearly impossible, giving my choice of images and their status--would reflect on me and not the site. The new policy, in a sense, puts policing that out of my willingness to decide the risk is slim enough for me to bear the burden and puts policing this work on the shoulders of the SWG. So I might have to reconsider a few images. Or just pull them all to avoid the amount of work that would be involved in vetting each and every one. However, I may be dramatically over thinking this?]
no subject
Date: 2013-10-30 10:12 pm (UTC)If you are using images that are over 100 years old, then I think it's safe to say that they are in the public domain. In the U.S., something enters the public domain after 75 years, so if it was made prior to 1923, you're usually in the clear. (When making winners' banners for SoWD, I found a gorgeous circus painting ... from 1924. Grr.) I have found Wikimedia Commons useful in selecting artwork (mostly for SWG banners), since it very clearly lists whether an item is in the public domain, so a quick check there should confirm. If you have trouble finding information on whether a particular piece is in the public domain, drop us a line, and we'll see if we can figure that out.
If it is in the public domain, it is good to go, and you can modify it and repost it as you please. The only caveat, on our site, is that we still ask that credit to the original artist be provided (for the same reason you'd credit Charles Dickens if quoting his stories, even though his work is public domain by now).
The photos I used, some of which are screen caps of obscure sources, altered, I am not entirely sure when the changes make them original artwork and they stop belonging to the photographer or film maker
I am not sure I am understanding the situation here. Are you saying that the were altered by someone else prior to your using them?
If they were altered by someone else, then that person becomes the rights holder. For example, if I make a photomanip with "Starry, Starry Night" as the background, then I am the rights holder for the image. You would then need to seek my permission to use the photomanip I made.
Some museums even try to claim rights over photos taken in their museums of things which clearly belong to history and never were under copyright.
My understanding of this is that it is the photos themselves that are under copyright, not the art being photographed. So if I go to the Met and photograph a Roman statue, I hold the copyright for that photo. However, you can go to the Met right behind me, take the same photo with your camera, and use the image to your heart's content, since the statue itself is not a copyrighted work.
Here are the articles we used for writing the FAQ:
Are You Using Images on Your Website Illegally?
Copyright Fair Use and How it Works for Online Images
Copyright and use of photographic images on the web
Blog Law: Photo Use and Etiquette
no subject
Date: 2013-10-30 10:40 pm (UTC)If they were altered by someone else, then that person becomes the rights holder. For example, if I make a photomanip with "Starry, Starry Night" as the background, then I am the rights holder for the image. You would then need to seek my permission to use the photomanip I made.
No! I made all the photoshopped images myself starting with out-of-copyright art and/or random photos--in all but one or two cases, I altered them dramatically.
I have already caused you and me way too much trouble. I will be very conservative on the rights question liberally delete anything I cannot remember the source for or what does not include a citation for the original art or artifact already.
P.S. I used to think that museums would not let people take photos because they were afraid of flashes damaging pictures or disturbing other patrons, but in my cranky old age I have asked a few times why I couldn't take a picture and explained I would not use a flash and was told it did not matter, they did not allow anyone to photograph their art or exhibits without authorization. Some museums do let one take pictures, but a lot of them will not allow it. Which is so unfair. One has the photos on the internet, ways and means to view and copy them, and the art or artifacts might be 1,000 years old and still the access to them is restricted. It has to do with the exclusive sale of catalogs, postcards, and tchotchkes. It is always money.
I am so fucking cranky today. Please forgive me!!
no subject
Date: 2013-10-30 11:50 pm (UTC)I made all the photoshopped images myself starting with out-of-copyright art and/or random photos
As long as it's in public domain, then it's okay. If the photos are yours (or you have permission to use them, or they are appropriately licensed for use), then that's okay too.
We are here to help, so none of that about causing too much trouble already. ;) I'd rather we mod-types put our heads together and keep a piece on the archive than to have it deleted because you weren't sure if it was okay.
On museums ... yes, that sucks. I've always bought the line about flashes damaging the paper, but I suppose that ruse is revealed as such in the day of camera phones, which often don't use flashes. But that's a bit different than copyright; I suppose they'd argue that, as the "owner" of those works, they can use them how they please. I don't personally agree--cultural artifacts should belong to everyone, imo--but the point still remains that if you photograph something at a museum, and the work you photographed is in the public domain (as most stuff in museums is!), then you are free to use that photo how you want.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-31 12:03 am (UTC)