Advice please

[anything4utvbi]

hello

I have written a femdom bdsm story (not a web tease).
I have been working on it for over two year and is currently over 100,000 words.
The problem I have is I want to share it, but it's also illustrated with porn images from the Internet.
The images form an important part of the story but I don't own the copyright!
I have edited all the images, blured out faces and warped some of them.
To take them out would be a real shame, and would only leave the photos I have taken of myself in it.

If I have edited them will it be ok to share my story?
People reblog images taken by others all the time!

Any advice please.

Lisa x x x

[janmb]

Sounds like something well within the definition of Fair Use to me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use), but you might wanna hear it from seraph0x before proceeding to publish it here on milo.

[les]

Off the top of my head if the pictures are not from a pay site, and you do not edit out references to their origin
You should be OK.
But then again I may be slightly askew in my memory.

[SexualChoc]

I am not as familiar with UK intelligence rights laws
as the ones in USA

but are you planning on Publishing this work?
or making Money off of it?


Generally things are not as strict if you are Not making money.
However IF you do plan to publish
you should send in the text with the pictures you have selected
generally publishers are more able to get access to copy right laws

so it does depend on where you are planning to put the work...

Strict susan has shown several works of erotica from her site
http://www.strictsusan.com/
if you are thinking of publishing
She is a member here on Milovana and has promoted her works.

[Salamando]

Alternatively, I would recommend Smashwords if you want to go the self-publish, ebook route.

As for the photos, no, it is not legal for you to use them, unless you have the express permission of whoever owns the copyright. If you pulled it from the internet, this will usually be the one who created the picture. The thing about people reblogging pictures all the time, often without even asking, that's illegal. However, like most internet piracy, it is one of those things most people get away with because its a tremendous pain in the ass to actual file a suit against hundreds of random, no-name bloggers. If you are looking to publish this as a print book, however, that will be a much easier target for people to go after, as they could attempt to sue to publisher, which would of course trickle back to you. Even editing and warping the picture will not technically free you from this restriction.

If this is a free work you just want to post on the net without making money, its still technically illegal, but its a lot less likely for anyone to care enough to come after you. At worst, you might just be told to remove the images on the odd chance some recognizes their picture and wants it removed.

This is from an American perspective, however, so I don't know how the rules may apply in other nations or internationally.

[anything4utvbi]

Thanks for all the replies so far.

I have no intention to make money out of the story.
As I said before the images are edited to faces are blurred, but I have also edited out water marks and logos.

I was thinking of putting it up as a website, that people could just go onto to read it. My thinking being if people can reblog on tumblr then it should be ok?!?

Lisa x

[Salamando]

Thanks for all the replies so far.

I have no intention to make money out of the story.

That makes things a lot easier, then.

As I said before the images are edited to faces are blurred, but I have also edited out water marks and logos.

Ah. Well, if they have watermarks and logos, then that's definitely not stuff people want being posted around for free, edited or otherwise, so yeah, you run a higher risk of getting into trouble with that. It's watermarked for a reason.

I was thinking of putting it up as a website, that people could just go onto to read it. My thinking being if people can reblog on tumblr then it should be ok?!?

I repeat, it actually isn't okay that people reblog stuff on tumblr the way they do, but again, it's one of those things everybody does and everybody seems to get away with, so I doubt you'd actually get into trouble for it, especially posting your story for free. So, really, it's just up to you whether or not you want to risk it. Realistically, though, the most that would likely happen is the original copy write holder finds out, and asks you to remove the pictures. Worst case, the web-host might shut down your page if they feel the need. But like I said, tons of people get away with it, so you probably will too.

[AliceInBondageLand]

Maybe having an artist you like re-shoot the same poses is the best way if you would like to publish your book?

Using other people's photos without permission is BIG no-no legally.

[anything4utvbi]

But isn't it a bit like putting images in a webtease?
If I put the story on a blog, surly the worst they will do is ask me to remove it???

Sadly I don't have the money to get the images reshot, but thanks for the advice.

Unless anyone on milovana wants to model and I'll take the shots?

I wish.

X

[Jaguar]

Not sure how old this thread is (didn't check!), but as far as I am aware, then the sole license holder, unless otherwise stated, is the publisher. The photographer may also hold a license for each photo. Unless you have obtained permission directly, you do not hold a license to distribute, edit or otherwise modify as part of a work of your own. If however the photos were released under a creative commons license, then it would be a whole different story.

[micheleFFS]

Jaguar is correct. Also, modifying the images does not get around the copyright holder's rights. I have illustrated several of my own stories for my own use, but I don't publish them illustrated on public forums .

If the writing's good, the images formed in the reader's imagination beat any photos.

michele

[micheleFFS]

Ahem. My avatar contradicts my last post!

michele

[janmb]

As for the photos, no, it is not legal for you to use them, unless you have the express permission of whoever owns the copyright.

generally correct, but there are exceptions, like the one I pointed out - which applies to US jurisdictions too.

What I can not state for sure, is whether Fair Use applies to this case at all - that's always down to opinion on whether the images can be considered merely republished (not ok) or if they can be considered a minority compared to the authors own creative contribution - in the latter case media can be used without any conflict with copyrights - regardless of owners' consent.

The irony is that cases like the one OP brought up here is precisely what Fair Use tries to govern. But it's very much a gray scale and not black and whites.

From wikipedia:

"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, search engines, 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."


Refer to the link in my first post and read up on it - good knowledge regardless of this case. It is essential to meet the requirements of Fair Use properly, but when you DO meet them, you can legally use otherwise copyrighted material without consent.

And again: This question really needs to be directed to seraph0x, not the users of this site.

[Susan Strict]

1. Good writing doesn't need pictures with it - other than, perhaps, a "cover photo" to catch the reader's attention. The only exception MIGHT be when a writer creates a story around an existing photo or a bit of artwork.

2. All photos, artwork AND writing is copyright to the creator UNLESS the creator expressly gives away his/her rights. There are no exceptions. Worldwide.

3. Many artists, photographers and models are happy to have their pictures used by other people - which doesn't mean they're giving away their rights; it only means they will allow it. Unless the copyright owner has specifically said that his/her work can be used, you should ask for pemission. Using material without asking is downright rude, even if you get away with it.

4. You can be prosecuted for breach of copyright, and so can the owner of any website where you share it with anyone else. Mostly, the owner of the copyright won't bother because it's not worth the trouble. But they might. And they're entitled to do it. You, and any site owner who actively or passively allows you to do it can be liable for damages firstly for any loss of revenue the copyright owner might have suffered, secondly for any loss of revenue the copyright holder might suffer in the future, thirdly for any money you made out of it AND/OR the estimated value of any benefit you might have gained from using it (which can include intangibles like enhancing your reputation) and fourthly general damages for the inconvenience of having you use their work without permission. And costs.

5. It doesn't matter that you would never be able to pay the damages or costs. If you breach copyright, then sooner or later you're going to run into a very rich copyright holder who doesn't give a fig about the money but is so annoyed that their copyright has been breached that they'll employ a legal team to take every penny you've got and make you bankrupt (or whatever the equivalent is in your particular country) so you never get credit of any sort again.

Having said all that, many people get away with it. You might. You might not.

So, in summary:
(a) Do you need it?
(b) Ask before using it.

And, above all, don't use something that someone else has taken time and effort to create unless they say you can. It's very rude.

[janmb]

2. All photos, artwork AND writing is copyright to the creator UNLESS the creator expressly gives away his/her rights. There are no exceptions. Worldwide.

Incorrect - as I have extensively described above.

The idea that a creative artist's work is theirs to control without limitations is simply not legally correct, even though I agree that it would logically makes sense - and of course being the polite way of thinking. But fact remains that there are in fact several cases where others can legally use your work, without your consent, knowledge or acceptance at all.