How Big Websites Like Huffingtonpost Get All The Images?

[mikesideas]

I understand the basics of copyrights but lets say i find a picture on huff post i right click, properties , take the image url , then go back to wordpress and add that to my site with a caption of where i found that picture,is this illegal?

The image is not hosted on my site , and i would have included a caption but it will be me who adds the picture not a user of my site

eg
picture by - claire jackson

I have never done anything like this before, normally i use creative commons images found on flickr or take my own,make my own , or in some cases i have purchased them from sites like istock.

Now i am building a large content site which will need lots of images i need to find another way of doing this. If sites such as huff post are buying these images how do they get them so fast? Where do they get them from? How much would images licence's such as these cost?


I have always even been scared of embedding certain youtube videos because of the same problem,i cant afford for any copyright complaints or anything along these lines. Clear guidelines which are easy to follow, I have been over to dmca , and sites like these, but i am not a lawyer half those words i dont even understand

Does this fall under fair use? 1/2 pictures per page?

My site is not going to be anything illegal like these movie racket sites it will just be kind of a news site


Thanks for any help and advice

[shaymm]

I will be following this page as I too would like to know about the legalities. From my understanding, if you site the source you are allowed to use 'their' content, unless stated otherwise. The reason I quote 'their' is because half of the time they too are borrowing content posted elsewhere.

Good question

[GMF]

When you steal a car but say where and from whom you stole it, you still committed a crime.
Stealing is stealing, even if you state where you got it.

You can ask for permission to use the pictures, or scan for other free images.

[shaymm]

I have emailed websites and asked for permission, but with some photos finding the original source isn't possible. So, i simply hyperlink them to their original source.

I understand your example, but I don't think it implies to every situation. Obviously, taking your example directly would, but in the world of the web it might not. Again, I'm still looking for answers...as this isn't so cut and dry.

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by shaymm

I have emailed websites and asked for permission, but with some photos finding the original source isn't possible. So, i simply hyperlink them to their original source.

I understand your example, but I don't think it implies to every situation. Obviously, taking your example directly would, but in the world of the web it might not. Again, I'm still looking for answers...as this isn't so cut and dry.

You not being able to find the owner of an image to request permission to use it does not in any way change that you do NOT have permission to use it.

This is so simple. If it is not yours, not knowing who it belongs to still doesn't make it yours to use. Linking does not give you permission.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html

[Cricket]

Think about it this way. Let's say you find the absolutely perfect land for hunting, but no matter how hard you try, you can't track down the owners for permission.

Does that change that it is NOT your land and you DO NOT have permission to trespass or use it in any way?

[mikesideas]

You cannot compare this situtuion to stealing car, first stealing is taking the orignal,if i link to an image theft has not been commited because the orignal is still there. The same with piracy, piracy basically means making a copy, if i link to an image,a copy has not been made,its still the orignal picture that i am linking to,we also have fair use,just look at rwj on youtube he abuses the fair use policy.

Let say there is an art gallery accross the road from me,but when i look out of my window i can see the art gallery's pictures,if i start inviting people to my house to see that art from my window. How can this be theft? I could understand monetary gain issues or damages,but not theft or piracy. If i took their pictures from the art gallery and left them with no pictures,this would be theft surly?

I just really cannot understand how linking to an image could be classed as piracy or theft.

[GMF]

Originally Posted by mikesideas

Let say there is an art gallery accross the road from me,but when i look out of my window i can see the art gallery's pictures,if i start inviting people to my house to see that art from my window.

Oh Boy, here we go.

What you describe would be as followed: You see a picture, copy ONLY the link and paste it, so that there is ONLY the link to the picture (so no <img tags). THAT would be fine.

The same with piracy, piracy basically means making a copy

True, but you still make a copy without permission. And that's why it is illegal, no matter how you argue it. You NEED permission to make a copy. Even if you take the code, don't change it so that it's still loaded from their server, put it into <img tags, it is STILL a COPY and you still NEED permission to do that.

[mikesideas]

I understand making copies is illegal, but how am i copying if i am linking to the original? If i right click save image to computer then upload to server this would be a copy, but i am not, i am taking the source url and linking to that.

[GMF]

Originally Posted by mikesideas

I understand making copies is illegal, but how am i copying if i am linking to the original? If i right click save image to computer then upload to server this would be a copy, but i am not, i am taking the source url and linking to that.

While that might be true that the original still resides on their server, you still made a copy. You copied the code and use it in a way that produces a copy of this image (put it in <img tags). Now, you could argue that this is not a copy because it is not on your server but you use something that doesn't belong to you (you are also using the server of someone else, which could also get you a lawsuit if they have a bright lawyer).

There is no real life allegory for this situation, because one cannot hot-link to a picture in a gallery.

[ScriptMan]

Originally Posted by mikesideas

I understand making copies is illegal, but how am i copying if i am linking to the original? If i right click save image to computer then upload to server this would be a copy, but i am not, i am taking the source url and linking to that.

In this example you are hot-linking and stealing bandwidth.

I realize the truth is not always pleasant to hear because it may not be what want to hear but Cricket and GMF told you the absolute truth. If you don't have permission, you are breaking the law. The fact that it is easy to do does not change the fact.

[mikesideas]

OK Guys thanks for your help i justed wanted to be 100% clear, stealing bandwidth makes sense i never thought about it like this. I would not like it if people did that to me so it does make sense for sure.

So the idea of linking to other websites images is out of the window,How do they magage to pay for that many pictures and still get a return on investment?

Celebrity pictures i guess do not come cheap and i would say you could pay hundreds or possibly more per picture, lets say the pay £2000 per article for the rights to use those images on that page. I cant see how one article on my site would genertae me enough profit to pay for the use of those images.

Does any know of any good websites where you can buy/rent/licence celebrity pictures?

I am making a high authorty website as a long term project, minimum 20 posts per day after 3/5 years i would expect to earn a good living from this site, in the meantime i have many basic high traffic blogs to keep me going,but these are stating to bore me,i want to make something which i would be able to be pround of, and say yes thats mine, most of my sites lol i would never dream of addmitting they were mine. They are just qucik 10 page blogs made for two reason, traffic & money

I want to do things different , i will still carry on making these little blogs because this is my income , but i want to start a website that i respect , and build up a good community, this is just not possible with the sites i currenty own.

[GMF]

Originally Posted by mikesideas

OK Guys thanks for your help i justed wanted to be 100% clear, stealing bandwidth makes sense i never thought about it like this. I would not like it if people did that to me so it does make sense for sure.

My words sound harsh, but I don't want to see someone getting sued. Good that you decided to choose the legal route .

How do they magage to pay for that many pictures and still get a return on investment?

I don't know the huffington post that much, but I am pretty sure that they have many journalists that just do that - making pictures. There are also many, many freelancers that offer these pictures, but, as you said, these are usually not cheap.

I cant see how one article on my site would genertae me enough profit to pay for the use of those images.

Yeah, that is really a big problem. Not only for you. Many newcomers ask themselves how one can get good (and cheap/free) pictures.

Does any know of any good websites where you can buy/rent/licence celebrity pictures?

Sadly, I don't know of any, but I bet that there are some places.

[mikesideas]

Thanks GMF - I would much prefere to hear harsh words in this forum than complaints from dmca in my email. Anyway those words you said was not harsh its the truth and this is what i wanted.

I found a place called getty images these have quite a good selection of celeb pictures, the price works on a 3 month basis the average price is $70 per picture per month.

Even though that is still cheap it has made me reconsider starting the website, I will not say i am good at seo , but i am not bad , normally i get to target positions with a few weeks but cost of paying for those pictures would take pretty much all my advertising revenue. Its back to the drawing board now i will try and find something that needs less media content

[shaymm]

Originally Posted by mikesideas

Thanks GMF - I would much prefere to hear harsh words in this forum than complaints from dmca in my email. Anyway those words you said was not harsh its the truth and this is what i wanted.

I found a place called getty images these have quite a good selection of celeb pictures, the price works on a 3 month basis the average price is $70 per picture per month.

Even though that is still cheap it has made me reconsider starting the website, I will not say i am good at seo , but i am not bad , normally i get to target positions with a few weeks but cost of paying for those pictures would take pretty much all my advertising revenue. Its back to the drawing board now i will try and find something that needs less media content

I wouldn't scrap the idea just yet. There is such a thing as using content from public domains. The content from public domains are free to use and will not be considered an infringement of copyright laws.

[mikesideas]

Originally Posted by shaymm

I wouldn't scrap the idea just yet. There is such a thing as using content from public domains. The content from public domains are free to use and will not be considered an infringement of copyright laws.

I use cc images all the time but there is really not that good pictures of celebs,the thing is i need them as and when the news happens,i cant be waiting years for people to upload them as cc. I didnt want to scrap the idea its just i have no option to, Nobody wants to see cc images on a celeb news site,when they can go any other site and get real pictures. I am am still looking into making a large content site, its just finding the right sector, thanks for you help it means a lot

[Sonnyboy]

Ok. Check this here out. I buy mostly all of my images from Bigstock photos. However, on my post page I copy logos in many instances for each individual post to show the org I am referring to.

My main question is: my site is nonprofit. It's not a traditional business. My aim is to disseminate information, not to make dollars. Therefore, am I still liable. I'd let you all take a peek, but I can't remember the rules; that is, can I show a link to my post page?

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by Sonnyboy

Ok. Check this here out. I buy mostly all of my images from Bigstock photos. However, on my post page I copy logos in many instances for each individual post to show the org I am referring to.

My main question is: my site is nonprofit. It's not a traditional business. My aim is to disseminate information, not to make dollars. Therefore, am I still liable. I'd let you all take a peek, but I can't remember the rules; that is, can I show a link to my post page?

Yeah, show me what you are explaining.

[Cricket]

Originally Posted by Cricket

Yeah, show me what you are explaining.

FWIW it does not matter if you intend to use an image for profit or not if you don't have permission. That being said, most of the time bigger organizations have a page letting you know what you can and cannot do.

[Cricket]

I looked at the blog in your profile and did not find any likely issues, but please keep in mind that I am NOT an attorney no do I play one on the internet.

HOWEVER, the pages I viewed seemed to be "fair use".

Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

For me personally, I tend to ask or look for TOS information on the site.