What Is The Best Way To Add Credits To A Painting?

Dow,

I never use CC images for all of those reasons. I go straight to PD images.

While I give old master painters the credit due, I have been taking the photos of unknown recent stuff in the PD and the source is not even listed. The sites I get them from I vet on Google. They are established as PD sites. I will always openly discuss the use of PD images, but if the photographer is a total unknown.......it is unimportant with PD images to say anything. He or she has purposely given up all rights to the image.

There is a certain amount of being self serving about all of this. That is one of the cornerstones of private property. My alterations are private property registered with the USCO. I am not in this for other artists.

I do not understand your concerns really. Not sure why you want to go the CC route and give up some of your property rights. It is hard enough to make a living at this.

Dave

I don't know of any standard way to credit art sources, when you're making a derivative work from a source photo (or source image) that has someone else's intellectual property rights attached to it.

Probably not a helpful answer, but if you're using someone else's image, you probably need to find out what the image-owner wants in the way of credits. You would then do the credits using whatever system you and the image owner agree on.

It would be nice if there were an industry standard for this, but I suspect the reason there isn't is there are so many different ways to use source photos, and so many different ways to do credits, that hard rules would limit what people can do.

It does mean you have to re-invent the wheel every time you use a different person's photo as a source.

If you're getting source photos off of a website that allows reproduction of the work on its website with credit to the photographer, or whatever, the website might have some info on how you should do the credits -- for source photos from that particular website. If you're using Creative Commons, and you have a question on how to do source credits, probably your best bet is to contact Creative Commons and ask what you should do.

I have 2 pieces of art posted here on FAA that I made using other people's photos as source material (Deer Reflecting, and Model T). I tried to come up with ways to credit the photographers but I never succeeded in developing a system for crediting source photographers that I felt was satisfactory.

Disclaimer: As always, not legal advice.

ah Cheryl.....

He is using Creative Commons, that is the industry standard. I believe he is supposed to label his work with the license he is using. The different CC licences are all spelled out for him. He needs to add attribution from the sounds of it. Then he wants attribution. The CC license says he can use the image for his own commercial gain, but his work then can be used as well by someone else. He probably can not copyright his work under this arrangement.

I am qualifying my statements because I have not seen the CC license he is subscribing to use, but I have read them all. He is not using the least offense....which really boils down to PD work. That is where the CC system falls away.

I think you know all of this?

Dave

Dow and Cheryl,

My method of giving attribution is to put the artist's name in my titles.

I also pay homage to one artist.

Dave

>>>
I do not understand your concerns really. Not sure why you want to go the CC route and give up some of your property rights. It is hard enough to make a living at this.

Dave

-------------

I wouldn't care about property rights after I'm dead. If I don't publish them when I can, a site could just hit a delete button and it would be all gone in 0.00000000000000000001 second. That s a lot faster then my fastest blink.

-------------

>>>... Then he wants attribution. The CC license says he can use the image for his own commercial gain, but his work then can be used as well by someone else. He probably can not copyright his work under this arrangement.

Dave

-----------

I understand how hard celebrities work and using their images to gain fame would be wrong. That would be easy and unfair. CC has really great images not found on CC0. CC rules seems fair but there's so many ways to display images. You can post images with credit lines or you can show at a art show with credits on a tag. People could take it and do things with your images like repost or resell. Lost in translation could happen and no credits would be displayed. I was thinking at least I could do is put the credits directly on the art. Could be ugly but fair. My name and the photographers name, alone would be confusing. Help me figure a better way to do this. I could do this:
________
Dow Thompson
Using John Doe's photo
--------------
That's ugly!
Dow Thompson
John Doe
Is pretty but confusing. Like to add one word. What wording could that be?

Dave, credit in titles is a great idea but will it hold in court?

David:
I don't use Creative Commons, so I'm not familiar with their specific requirements. If I do ever use Creative Commons' art as source material, I will make a point of reading and following their attribution requirements. If I have questions about how Creative Commons' attribution system works, I will ask Creative Commons, I won't ask people on FAA.

Creative Commons approach is not an industry standard, it's the Creative Commons standard.

If I am using art from another source, a source other than Creative Commons, it could be a huge mistake to just go with the Creative Commons approach and consider myself done, as far as attribution is concerned. If I am using someone else's art as source material, I have to go the owner of the IP (intellectual property) rights, and find out what the IP rights owner wants me to do for attribution.

That's my understanding anyway.

Disclaimer: As always, not legal advice.

*********
"Dave, credit in titles is a great idea but will it hold in court?"

To the best of my knowledge and belief, Dave is not a lawyer. If you want that answer, you need to ask a lawyer and get real legal advice.

My guess (and I *am* a lawyer, but please note this is my guess, not my legal advice) is that *if* the image gets separated from the title... as it could if somehow the image gets spread around the internet without the title attached, there is a possibility that with the disappearance of the title comes the risk that you will have failed in your duty to adequately attribute the artwork.

You need to work out what, exactly, your attribution responsibilities are, according to the person whose work you are using, and comply with what that person says they want you to do to meet those responsibilities. You should, to protect yourself and to create a record of what was agreed, get that in writing -- or at least get that in an email that you save. I would get that agreement in place *before* I started making any derivative works.

If the IP owner specifically agrees that including attribution in the title is enough, then including attribution in the title is enough. My understanding is that agreement would most likely hold up in court. But again, my internet postings are not a substitute for real legal advice from your own lawyer.

Disclaimer: As always, not legal advice.