Caedes

Non-art Website Issues

Discussion Board -> Non-art Website Issues -> COC Reminder

COC Reminder

=Samatar
01/15/12 1:33 AM GMT
It seems that it is necessary, once again, to remind people of parts A and B of section 2 in the COC, namely:

a. Only upload images for which you have full intellectual property, fair use, or redistribution rights or permissions.


b. If you use any material that you did not create, you must state the source of that material in the image description.

It is NOT okay to post an image you "found on the internet", regardless of what type of image it is, how many prints you have seen of it, how much it cost the owner etc etc. Unless it SPECIFICALLY STATES on the webiste you take it from that the image is in the public domain, or that you are allowed to post it elsewhere on the internet, then you MUST NOT upload the image or any part of it to the site.

Furthermore, if you do take any part of an image you upload to the site from such a source, you MUST state that fact and you MUST provide a link to the site which you took it from, showing that the image is in the public domain. If you do not, the image WILL be removed.

You are also allowed to post images, or parts of images, made by other people if their permission has been granted to you to do so. Again, you must make it clear on your upload that you have permission from the author and provide links to any relevant information. Again, it is NOT okay to just ask the permission and post the image even if you have not received a reply.

If you "don't know" or "are not sure" or "don't understand" whether an image is public domain, or whether you haev permission, it probably isn't and you probably don't. So don't upload it. This is not a grey area and there is little tolerance for those who break this part of the COC, particularly long term members who should know better. Any member who deliberately or continuously flaunts this area of the COC may face having their caedes gallery deleted or similar disciplinary action.

If I have failed to be clear in any area here please ask for further clarification.
2∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion
mindmelt
01/15/12 2:38 AM GMT
Theres a hall of shame for comments why not for image posts?
0∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/15/12 2:40 AM GMT
Because if we knowingly allowed the image to remain visible, we'd be complicit in the (potential) copyright violation.
0∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
mindmelt
01/15/12 2:53 AM GMT
Put a big X on image but shame it.
0∈ [?]
=Samatar
01/15/12 2:54 AM GMT
Not a bad idea actually. No way to implement it myself though.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
mindmelt
01/15/12 2:57 AM GMT
well atleast that way 3 X's your out.
0∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/15/12 9:37 PM GMT
Just to make sure this was absolutely clear above, due to a recent incident:

If you're waiting for a reply for permission to use material you did not create yourself, you do NOT have permission.
5∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
.Nikoneer
01/15/12 10:14 PM GMT
Without knowing what the "incident" was, the membership can still interpret it as they feel necessary. It could have been anything. It's also possible you mods could have been wrong in your assessment.
0∈ [?]
If you've ever wanted to make a difference but found it hard to believe that one person could... check out the Kiva Team Caedes discussion thread and discover that anything is possible.
+purmusic
01/15/12 10:34 PM GMT
\/ What she said.
0∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/15/12 10:41 PM GMT
Hi Nik, I apologize, it seems that came out the wrong way. I actually was not intending to publicly address the particular incident since it is a private matter unless the member chooses to make it public. It was only the trigger that made me want to make sure this was understood.

My goal was only to reinforce the understanding that "waiting for a reply" is not enough to go ahead and post an image, you must wait until you have been answered and have a "yes" answer in your hot little hands... er... inbox... er... wherever.
0∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
::Dunstickin
01/16/12 8:36 AM GMT
The post in question was mine! Titled 'AD's'...snapped at a local open air museum in which the public are encouraged to take!
HERE .. And HERE.. they also have thier own page for people to display their photo's on FLICKR

I have been a 'Friend of Beamish' at this museum for quite some years, and the place encourages visitors to take pictures and display them where they will, because this promotes Beamish!



Imagine the many thousands of photographs that has been taken of the same snap I took and posted here .. These 'adverts' are displayed throughout the museum on the many buildings and transports, do you imagine that the promoter's of those ads would allow that to happen?



The museum also caters for all camera clubs in the UK and has special days for these clubs to visit and snap what they wish, and display/show where they wish!



I have been a member on here for many years, and this will be my only comment on this matter, I am past caring, because there seems to be nothing but arguments, backbiting and petty squabbles throughout this site now!



Seems like all 'The Good Times' have gone .. Maybe, it is time for me too!

Bob aka [Dunstickin] definitely 'Dun'
16∈ [?]
::biffobear
01/16/12 9:42 AM GMT
Yes people are slowly being driven away..The adverts from Beamish are from a bygone era too.Those products are no longer available..It's about time some common sense was used when it comes to censorship,Otherwise this site will die the death...
5∈ [?]
Donald Duck comics were banned from Finland because he doesn't wear pants
+purmusic
01/16/12 10:08 AM GMT
Re: Form letter sent.. with respect to "Ad's:

"Your Image has been temporarily placed in limbo while the moderators discuss if it is allowable under the CoC. As soon as we come to a consensus, you will be informed. Thank you in advance for your understanding and patience in this matter."

Seems reasonable, no?
_______________________________________________________________

PM sent after a decision was arrived at:

"Re: "Ad's"

Rowntree's Elect Cocoa (basically defunct, it was bought out by Nestle 25 years ago)

http://www.historyofyork.org.uk/themes/victorian/rowntree-co-chocolate-manufacturers

Beach's Jams (also basically defunct, bought out and limitedly used as a name by the new owners by 1971, probably completely dead now.

http://www.bhsproject.co.uk/families_beach.shtml

Veno's Lightning Cough Cure (appears to be a quack cough medicine, although put out by a "legitimate" drug company, and still has current branding as "Veno's for Kids"

http://www.manchester-forum.co.uk/index.php?topic=856.0

Lipton Tea - Definitely active.

Borwick's Baking Power - still an active brand.

http://www.healthysupplies.co.uk/borwicks-baking-powder-100g.html

Wills's Gold Flake Cigarettes (Merged with another corporation and still used the brand in the U.K. until the 1980's, still an active brand in India)

http://www.ngw.nl/heraldrywiki/index.php?title=Wills%27s_-_Borough_arms_I

Player's Navy Cut (Merged with same corporation as Wills', retained branding identity and continues to sell under the Player's name)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Player_%26_Sons

U.K. Copyright laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Kingdom


Summary:

Given that we can reliably date most of these ads as 1940's or prior, and that the author's or in case of several authors, the copyright lasts lifetime plus 70 years. Publisher's right last 25 years, but as ads the works themselves would be the holding of the companies. Some of these may be defunct, but some are active, and the ads are the focus of the shot, they're not incidental.

Conclusion:

Rejected due to contravention of The Caedes.net Code of Conduct."

Fair and unbiased assessment, no? (Add to that.. a rather involved and exhaustive one, too.)
_______________________________________________________________


"Beamish Museum's photostream" on Flikr.

Went through the first 30 pages.

This image:

"1971 Mars Selection Box - Beamish Christmas Collections"

... and this image:

"1970s Christmas Selection Box - Beamish Collections"

I believe would be rejected on the site here.


Your image "Ad's", Bob ... referencing the issues of ownership/control over branding/copyrighted art work/ads ... does not reside with the Beamish Museum.

And.. the 'adverts' were far too prominent.

They were not incidental to the image, such as this one found on "Beamish Museum's photostream" on Flikr:

"Paul Mooney & Richard Evans - BBC Children in Need at Beamish"
1∈ [?]
=Samatar
01/16/12 11:02 AM GMT
Note that the Logo rule is different from the one I refer to at the start of this thread, which is about taking other peoples images from the web or other sources rather than advertising.

The logo rule has more grey areas and often requires investigation, such as Les has highlighted above.

In this case, although, yes, some of the brands in the photo are defunct, it seems that others are not and therefore we must treat it in the same way we would treat an image displaying a logo by Coca Cola or Mcdonalds. This sort of image has never been allowed as far as I know.
0∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
=Samatar
01/16/12 11:05 AM GMT
One more thing: I really think we need to get over the idea that we should just "let it slide" if it's only a "small" violation, or if the member is a long time member, etc.

We don't tolerate it when other people steal our images from this site, and my impression is that most of the members here have little patience for the excuses for such theft ("I didn't know" "It's just a small site" "I was promoting your work and you should be grateful" "It's on the internet so it's fair game etc). It is hypocritical for us to use the same excuses to justify the same sort of behaviour.
2∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 12:25 AM GMT
Bob, you may be correct that the copyright owners are fine with this usage, given that the images reside in the Beamish Museum. However - you can't fault us for not knowing that when you didn't properly credit the work. Had you noted that this is where you took the image, we could easily have investigated Beamish's photography rules, and found whether the usage was fine or not (just because it's in a museum and you're encouraged to take a picture of it, doesn't necessarily mean you're okay to go on posting it everywhere).

This was your narrative on the image: "Just a billboard full of old adverts"

With that narrative you left us no choice but to individually look up the respective brands and make a decision, because we had no indication of where this was taken, or what usage rights were available.

We do not enforce the crediting artwork portion of the CoC to be nitpicky, we do it for exactly this situation. You can't ask us to operate on information we don't know.
2∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
.Marzena
01/16/12 1:04 PM GMT
EJ has a beautiful motto, particularly the sentence about argument.
1∈ [?]
With all my love and respect, Marzena
::LynEve
01/16/12 2:15 PM GMT
"This was your narrative on the image: "Just a billboard full of old adverts"

With that narrative you left us no choice but to individually look up the respective brands and make a decision, because we had no indication of where this was taken, or what usage rights were available."

Could someone not just have contacted Bob and discussed it ?





Logo Rule . . . there are images on the site displaying logos.

and just to be nitpicky . "*NTV code: Only content that would be ok on network television is acceptable. (network television in the US, not Denmark!)"

I live in neither place and am not familiar with what is acceptable on US Network TV. Some of what I have seen on TV - from various countries including the US I would sincerely hope would not be acceptable on this site.


3∈ [?]
My thanks to all who leave comments for my work and to those of you who like one enough to make it a favourite. To touch just one person that way makes each image worthwhile. . . . . . . . . .. . . . "The question is not what you look at, but what you see" ~ Marcel Proust
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 2:48 PM GMT
Lyn, in this case, no. It is the member's responsibility to credit their work. It is not our responsibility - and for the purposes of available time, cannot be - to hunt down members and continually ask them if they have permission, or why they think they have permission. We need to be able to resolve it quicker than that from our end and move on.

As far as the logo rule - logos may be acceptable if they are *incidental* to the image. Incidental meaning that they are not the focus of the image, and nothing has been done to highlight them or make them the focus of the image.

In terms of fair usage rights, I've posted a thread here with some info and explanations.
0∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
::cynlee
01/16/12 3:37 PM GMT
So it would seem that had Dunstickin labeled his post differently, it would have been acceptable.

As to the second alleged infraction, it seems that if the original provider of the image, (not the gallery of the unmaniped image of same) were the only party to which credit were given, there would have been no infraction.

Nice to see you couching your language in the somewhat polite terms you used above instead of the harsh manner in which you address us privately, Sam(atar).

Bob is right in that the mods are driving people away and the site is not the once happy, cooperative and fun place it used to be. Even if the technicalities of some of what is said regarding the code above is true, the manner in which the individual situations are addressed could use some VAT or value added tact.

I believe there was some misinterpretation vis a vis the moderator evaluation of 'public domain' and copyright in both instances.

27∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 4:21 PM GMT
1) I am willing to revisit Bob's image with the new information received, however, there still may be an issue regarding logo & trademark usage, as these are the *focus* of the image.

2) I do not believe that the mods are "driving" people away, so much as some people are not willing to easily accept when a ruling goes against them, and there is nothing the mods can do about that. I have had people that I have been working with on "small violations" question why the images cannot stay, and I have been fairly patient about explaining - however, at some point - why does it have to be an argument almost every time? Why can it not just be "whoops, okay." and on to new things?

Hashing these things to death, complaining to others in pm's of the "wrongful treatment", responding in strong tones of anger or sadness or frustration when such issues are discussed publicly - snide comments made on images - I believe that all of these contribute much more to the lack of a fun cooperative atmosphere.

In every case, there is a procedure. If you (site members in general) think the decision has been wrong, then you have avenues to discuss why, and ask for the issue to be revisited. I posted a thread giving the contact information for the mods who are most available and a process for getting answers. Geri - the owner of this website, who is ultimately responsible for our decisions, is available to be contacted by pm and e-mail. Using these and seeing what answers and possible clarification and understanding can be had by them, is a much more productive and positive way of addressing issues.

As with all the rest of it however - the mods can't force anyone to use these avenues. We can only do our job from our end.
5∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
::cynlee
01/16/12 5:48 PM GMT
Avenues 'are' being pursued.

The threads are there to express opinions on the matter at hand. We are more than willing to accept change when we are privately, as well as publicly addressed as adults. The comment I made is just my opinion.

Geri may be contacted at geri@utk.edu or gragghia@gmail.com
6∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 6:06 PM GMT
I appreciate the very neutral tone of your reply. In the main, my point about usage of the threads was in terms of benefit of the doubt until avenues have been pursued, in terms of fostering a better atmosphere. If all avenues have been exhausted, and the dissatisfaction still exists it makes sense to express it publicly and let it be discussed. We all have a responsibility to foster the atmosphere we desire, through our own actions, words, and approaches to issues.

I am glad to hear that people are pursuing the other avenues to try and resolve their dissatisfaction.
0∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
+Piner
01/16/12 6:20 PM GMT
Let me lay it out for you nice and simple...

The reality of the situation is that Geri has been kind enough to give us use of (and pay the bills for) caedes.net so we have a place to post our works and to learn and discuss things. He has built the site from the ground up by himself and has put quite a few nice features at our disposal. He doesn't charge anybody a membership fee nor dues to enjoy the site. He only asks that the members follow the few rules, not be a troll, and to accept the judgements of the senate. Ultimately it is Geri's site and the members of the senate are only running the site as Geri has set forth. Senate members are dedicated to keeping the site up to Geri's standards, not your standards. Senate members have to answer directly to him and so they don't act unless they have due cause.

10∈ [?]
The work of art may have a moral effect, but to demand moral purpose from an artist is to make him ruin his work. (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - 1832)
::jeenie11
01/16/12 6:31 PM GMT
I for one would like to have Caedes continue to exist with the friends that I have made staying around. Perhaps, if all of us were more cordial and less sarcastic and insulting things would work out far better for all of us. I went back to my early days of membership and pulled up photos and comments. I would agree that there were very few true critiques. What was wrong with that? As far as I'm concerned NOTHING. There was lots of cordial behavior and camaraderie. I am still for making a suggestion in a PM. I don't particularly care if other members have growth from my comment. I'd just like to see all of us feel good about one another. What happened with Bob and Marzena were things I was unaware of. I'm sorry they happened. I hope they were answered in a firm but kind and cordial manner. Thanks for listening. jen
7∈ [?]
AVATAR BY PJ............... I'd like to thank those of you who have been so kind as to add my photos to your favorites. Please Visit My Gallery
.mesmerized
01/16/12 9:51 PM GMT
I don't even like Piner but I must applaud his post just above. We tend to think of this as 'our' site, which is not a bad thing, it's what gives the place its' community spirit, but in the final analysis it is Geri's site and we as guests should abide by his rules and respect his decisions. That said, we are none of us infallible...any one of us can make mistakes, both member or mod, whether re: the COC or behavioral issues...in the end it all comes down to respecting one another.

Oh, and about not liking Piner...just kidding...just trying to insert a little humor into an otherwise serious discussion...a little humor, something we could use more of around here and may help restore some of the fun we used to have...just my one and half cents worth.
10∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 10:12 PM GMT
That's okay Pat. Piner told me he doesn't like you either after you took out that last water balloon hit on him. 8•P
2∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
.third_eye
01/16/12 10:32 PM GMT
Ok, seriously (well, sort of), everyone chill out or you'll be made to kiss the lizard! :o)

2∈ [?]
=Samatar
01/16/12 10:41 PM GMT
If it would end the fussin' and a feudin', I would... gladly.

And I, for one, am being absolutely serious.
2∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
+animaniactoo
01/16/12 10:49 PM GMT
A note on the e-mail addresses given for Geri above - I believe one of those is his work account, and members should not e-mail him at that address.

The correct address to use (as given on his profile here) is caedes@caedes.net.
20∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
.mesmerized
01/17/12 12:32 AM GMT
I might also add that contacting Geri is an avenue I would only pursue after exhausting other efforts to resolve an issue and hopefully we won't abuse that priviledge by constantly bugging him with everything under the sun or one day he may simply get fed up with all of us and say, 'that's it folks, it's closing time'.
18∈ [?]
+purmusic
01/17/12 1:33 AM GMT
Soooo.. what's new? Did I miss anything?

:oP
0∈ [?]
.third_eye
01/17/12 1:37 AM GMT
Happy Hour....? ;-)
1∈ [?]
cynlee
01/17/12 1:39 AM GMT
I wouldn't worry about that, Pat. I don't believe that we currently bother Geri with very much and if he felt like closing the shop, he would do so regardless of any discontent that we might express. At least that is how I see him, as a reasonable individual who is ready to listen unless he has already lost interest in this site and community.
18∈ [?]
+purmusic
01/17/12 1:49 AM GMT
"Happy Hour".

Sounds so.. happy.

And hour'ish.

:oD
0∈ [?]
+purmusic
01/17/12 2:15 AM GMT
".. a little humor, something we could use more of around here ..."


Oooooh, so sorry, Pat.

Just checked.

It's against The Caedes.net Code of Conduct; Section 666.

:oP
1∈ [?]
mindmelt
01/17/12 5:17 AM GMT
The site mods are here to solve problems.Why does Caedes have to be summoned everytime anyone has a problem with the decisions the admins make?
4∈ [?]
cynlee
01/17/12 5:20 AM GMT
The above comment should be sent to the Hall of Shame. How rude and disgusting!
1∈ [?]
+purmusic
01/17/12 5:25 AM GMT
Huh.. interesting:

Discussion Board Search - 'fart'


First discussion thread:

"R.O.O.F."

"The R.O.O. F. is the Regiment Of Old Farts."
0∈ [?]
cynlee
01/17/12 5:33 AM GMT
Then you must be a soldier in that regiment, Les. And the comment is still rude and vile. tbob should be admonished. Got your Hall of Shame trigger ready?

So tell me again who it is that takes these discussions off track? There was no need for that useless comment and you know it is true, but you send lesser comments to the Kindergarten Hall of Shame at your leisure.
5∈ [?]
=Samatar
01/17/12 6:25 AM GMT
1∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
.mesmerized
01/17/12 6:42 AM GMT
Hey, not so fast with the Section 666, Les...there's still a few things left on the table to deal with...namely...cookie crumbs...please tidy up when you're finished!
1∈ [?]
+animaniactoo
01/17/12 12:00 AM GMT
For the record, only the Consuls can send a comment to the Hall of Shame, and if you think a comment is out of line and deserves to be shamed, please hit the "Complain" link directly under it.

In the meantime, I'm just going to check Section 667. Cuz it's... eviler.
1∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
+purmusic
01/17/12 12:53 AM GMT
Well, whaddya know?

The Caedes.net Code of Conduct:

1. General

h. Purmusic is responsible for general cleanup of the office area and discussion boards. Failure to complete these assigned daily duties will result in the loss of his parking space on the back lot (located by the dumpster) ... and possible further disciplinary actions.

Ok, then.. best get started.

(*goes into *caedes' office ... rearranges the stuff on the top of his desk according to colour hues*)

(*checks item off of list.. moves onto the outer offices*)

... ...

(*switches the name plates on alllll of the other executive office doors*)

(*checks item off of list.. punches out for coffee break*)
0∈ [?]
.cynlee
01/17/12 3:31 PM GMT
So you bought the site?
0∈ [?]
::danika
01/17/12 3:45 PM GMT
No, I bought the site!!!!

Break time .....

Anywho ... cookies & beverages are on me.

I recommend the double fudge oatmeal cookies ... yummy stuff.
0∈ [?]
"Packers Rock!" .... Fan of Karl Klug (DT) ~ Tennesse Titans .... Go Warriors ~ best of luck in the state football finals.
.third_eye
01/17/12 3:52 PM GMT
Well, at least the site "going to the dogs" with Sherree at the helm will be a good thing! :p

Double fudge oatmeal? Nice. Some strong coffee and a side of vanilla ice cream, if the operating budget can swing it, please.
0∈ [?]
::danika
01/17/12 4:11 PM GMT
Yes, some days it seems like my Labrador's 'rule the roost'.

But ... mostly it is very pleasant having them around each & every day. At least the dogs don't bark back or (bite back) when they have to follow set rules ... which in the long run leads to better behavior.

I've learned so much from Labrador's over the years ... all dogs are good teachers for mankind, but yet they know who 'the main boss' is & follow my CoC. I'm pretty good at training dogs, so I may be pretty good at training people too. Who knows.

I definitely live in a 'dogs world'.

White Chocolate Macadamia Cookies ... warm & fresh from the oven ... they might be a little crumbly as I over-baked them. My dogs like them that way. Still edible though.
0∈ [?]
"Packers Rock!" .... Fan of Karl Klug (DT) ~ Tennesse Titans .... Go Warriors ~ best of luck in the state football finals.
+animaniactoo
01/17/12 4:13 PM GMT
Wha whi hokhlat oogies?
0∈ [?]
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult...
+purmusic
01/17/12 11:18 PM GMT
"Wha whi hokhlat oogies?"

Ooooh.. the things that amuse me pea brain. Lol.
0∈ [?]
.marcaribe
01/18/12 1:37 AM GMT
Do they have any guided tours to the Hall Of Shame? I have always been curious about it and would like to see this mysterious place.
1∈ [?]
Please Join The Caedes Kiva Team
::Akeraios
01/18/12 1:48 AM GMT
I've always assumed they're like the "Easter eggs" on DVDs - you have to just stumble across them.
0∈ [?]
"In the beginning, there was nothing. Then God said, "Let there be light". And there was still nothing but you could see it." -- Groucho Marx
mindmelt
01/18/12 5:05 AM GMT
The guy set the place up right,lots of tools and freedom here to express yourself.Problem is abuse.There has to be rules there has to be people who drop the hammer when they are broke.If you dont follow the rule and it gets dropped on you then dont blame the mods they got rules they have to follow just like we do.
1∈ [?]
.Jhihmoac
01/25/12 12:04 AM GMT
OK...I'm respectful (most times) of the COC...

SOPA and PIPA...is however, another matter :P
1∈ [?]
"Put up...or SHUT UP!" Visit Jhihmoac's Gallery
+purmusic
11/11/12 8:54 PM GMT
~ le bump ~


Very simple, where using stuff/images/textures/etc. .. that 'you' (speaking generally here) DID NOT create yourself .. link to, state the source, credit such in your image's accompanying narrative.
0∈ [?]
=Samatar
11/11/12 10:58 PM GMT
To reiterate the above... there still seems to be some confusion on behalf of long term members as to when/why they must provide detailed information as to the source of material they did not create themselves.

Basically, in the past, if an image is uploaded and we are suspicious as to what the source of the image is, we had to PM the member and wait for a response as to where they got this material; or attempt to investigate and find the source ourselves. Often we would find it, somewhere on the internet, and the image would be removed as we had to assume the person did not have permission to use it; sometimes we could not, and we would have to try to decide whether it was suspicious enough to warrant rejection; sometimes we would get replies which explained the matter clearly and the images could remain; sometimes the replies were vague and evasive and the images were removed as they did not clear up the matter; sometimes we received no replies at all, or replies months later; sometimes we would get no response until after the image was removed (usually a self righteous one).

So the rule has now been applied that all members must specify the sources of any material they did not create themselves when they upload and provide links or any other relevant info as evidence of such. This makes it very simple, as we can simply remove the image if it is obvious the member has used third party material and there is no information provided.

IT DOES NOT MATTER what the source of the material is; whether you have purchased the rights, whether it was another member, something you found on the internet that is open source etc; If YOU did not make it YOURSELF you MUST specify the source and provide us with enough information that we can establish that fact. If you fail to do so you risk the image being removed; repeated transgression of this rule may result in suspension of upload privileges and if it gets to the point where we feel the member simply cannot be trusted, upload privileges may be removed permanently.

Now that this has been explained thoroughly I do not believe any member has an excuse for violating this rule again.
1∈ [?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
::cynlee
11/15/12 2:15 AM GMT
Starrynight

No credit given here. Image should be pulled.
0∈ [?]
+purmusic
11/15/12 5:15 AM GMT
I think.. it is reasonable to assume that in the circumstances of older images that were approved under the old CoC ... these images have been grandfathered in light of the changes introduced some months back.

Else..

'We' would have to go back through the entire collection of images on site here, PM/notify artists to either amend the accompanying narratives, etc. ... to bring the site up to.. ahem ... 'code'.
0∈ [?]
::cynlee
11/15/12 5:39 AM GMT
If the notification of the source of a borrowed image is not made , it still goes against the COC, which to my understanding is a protection of the web site from accusation and prosecution due to copyright infringements. Since you can't go through all the images on site, the rest of our eyes can report these older images for removal and bring conformity to the image standards as currently established for as many of the older posts as possible. The code does indeed end with the statement:

"ALL contributions to this site must be in compliance with the Caedes.net Code of Conduct"
0∈ [?]
+purmusic
11/15/12 6:03 AM GMT
"Paintings that are more than 90 years old would no longer be subject to copyright under U.S. law, so if you're in the U.S., you would be free to use the images in a craft item.

Sections 301 to 304 of the Copyright Act of 1978 provide some very complicated rules for duration of copyright. In the case of works as old as Mona Lisa and Starry Night, however, the rules boil down to the conclusion that the copyrights have expired.

You are free to use those images as you please (except that you can't pass off your image as the original, which you do not intend to do)."
0∈ [?]
::LynEve
11/15/12 6:18 AM GMT
The copyright rules of individual countries varies. I assume because this is a US based site then US copyright rules prevail.
The limitation of NZ copyright law lasts for 50 years after the death of the author/creator.
0∈ [?]
My thanks to all who leave comments for my work and to those of you who like one enough to make it a favourite. To touch just one person that way makes each image worthwhile. . . . . . . . . .. . . . "The question is not what you look at, but what you see" ~ Marcel Proust
+purmusic
02/23/13 11:41 AM GMT
~ le bump ~
0∈ [?]

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: