Just a question, but has anyone ever been contacted before about a picture on this site and how it's breaking terms of usage or something like that? Or by much simpler terms, has anyone been told to take a picture down before because it was copyrighted? And while we're at it, to what extent can we use the pictures from somewhere else until we authors get into trouble? Because I'd rather not be told one day that I should take a picture off of a story or chapter of mine. I already try my best to credit the artists on the pictures that I use, but sometimes I either forget, too lazy to credit, or can't source the original artist at all. Edit: I also remember getting a piece of "fan art" for my Red Alert 3 story. It was okay. The problem is, is that I know where those pictures are from. They're from this artist named Ganassa, but I see no mention of his name in the fan art that was made for me at all, and because of such, I refuse to use said fan art as my story's cover as I don't want to get in trouble with the original artist.
For such an accusation to actually mean anything, I understand it would need to be an official copyright takedown notice issued directly to CHYOA. You're not legally required to remove images otherwise (though it would be nice, provided all the evidence lines up). I don't believe this has ever actually happened before. There have been plenty of cases of textual plagiarism (rule 4), but those seem to be much easier to deal with. It's a common misconception, but credit is often meaningless. Legally (and arguably ethically), if an artist says "don't steal my work" and you steal and credit them, you've still stolen it; if an artist says "my work can be freely distributed" then crediting does nothing (some licences do specifically mention credit, however). What you actually need is permission from the artist. In the case of the fan work, just ask the artist if you can use it and under what conditions.
Users are legally responsible for the content they publish. If they don't have the right to publish the content, they shouldn't do it. They may have the right to publish/republish the content if - they created the content, - they have the permission of the copyright owner to reuse the content, - the use is covered by the copyright principle "fair use"
I think this is why the exponential increase of the pictures use may be a concern. Just give a look to what a fellow user of the forum posts daily. Does he ask the orignal arists before editing the pictures, I wonder. Also a lot of pictures rise concerns about the subjects represented: are they of legal age? do they pass the harkness test? I don't want to know the answers, but someone may want to. Just stick to a nice cover and be prepared to take it down eventually. You should risk nothing for copyright infringement's and such if you do not earn money from it anyway. I'd stick to the original picture and try to reach for the author, just give him a heads up. You're not lucrating on his stuff, and the picture is easily found on the internet so...
I am not a lawyer, but I work in a field where copyright is *very* important, so I'm fairly familiar (again not as a lawyer) with some of this stuff. I'm in the US so my understanding is US based, other jurisdictions may differ. All works are copyright unless that copyright is specifically disclaimed. This means that adding a picture to your story is a violation of copyright unless you either have specific permission (You want this in writing or at least in email, CHYOA would probably prefer that they were specifically mentioned), or the work is licensed such that you may reuse it. Giving credit is not enough unless the work is licensed such. Also be aware that copyright can claim both specific drawings and characters themselves. An original picture of Superman or a My Little Pony is a copyright violation of DC Comics and whoever owns My Little Pony, even though the work is original. My advice is first, don't use any copyrighted characters at all, this is going to apply to most images you might want for a fanfic, unfortunately. Then look for works that have specifically had their copyright disclaimed (this is called placing a work in the public domain) or that are licensed such that they can be reused with easy to follow instructions. The most common licenses used for artwork that allow reuse are the Creative Commons family of licenses. These place requirements such as attribution (crediting the creator), and clearly describe what you can do with it: whether you are allowed to edit the work, whether you are allowed to make money from the work or a derivative, whether you have to make any changes you make available under the same terms, etc (there are several flavors of these licenses). Google images allows you to set usage rights on image searches if you add click the "tools" icon. Several other search engines have similar options. While this makes sense from a "common sense" perspective, the US copyright system does not operate this way. Whether you make money from the infringement is not material to whether you are infringing. Making money off of the infringement opens you to criminal charges, but you can still end up in civil court for infringement even when you aren't profiting or preventing the creator from profiting (such as art posted on publically with no cost to view). I agree that it's unlikely that you're going to end up in court because you posted a picture in your story, but you could. tl;dr: Don't use any pictures unless you know that you're allowed to under their licensing terms.
This is very informative and helpful, but some of the points you make, especially those regarding how to acquire copyright-free images I think are in most cases not exactly feasible. I'm thinking to all those fanfiction stemming out of works of last decade for example. Also, personally I find it very frustrating already to search for a fitting picture, even without having to reduce my resources to only copyright-free images. I would probably just give up if that was my only option. These are probably the steps that someone aiming to have a patreon or to go semi-professional should consider, not us dweebs Another thing I would take into consideration, is that a great part of the pictures circulating on the site are themselves semi-amatorial works(not considering mr.hyde works) with all which that ensues. In those cases, I higly doubt the author would want to retaliate for using, let's say a cartoon reproduction of a naked Captain Marvel, whe he/her in the first place made an inappropriate use of other's intellectual properties, Marvel's in this example, don't you think? Marvel should take his stuff down in the first place, but that won't happen because nowdays they actually count on that kind of 'fallout'. So I don't see Ganassa, which for all I know is rather established, sueing you Warden-Yarn15 for using his picture as cover. To draw his stuff, did he ask the rightful copyright owners first? I honestly have no idea, but I'm inclined to belive he didn't.
I doubt any of us would end up in either a criminal or civil court, but you could. More likely CHYOA will get hit with a glut of DMCA takedown notices and the admins will spend a lot of their time deleting the offending images, or the holders will go to search indexes like Google and Bing and try to get CHYOA de-listed for copyright violations. There's also a fair use defense that might cover some uses cases of copyrighted characters, but the current system really favors the people initiating the take down, and not the people being accused of violating copyright. if CHYOA receives a take down notice, then the site would need to remove the image(s) in question, then potentially file a petition that the images do no in fact violate copyright. That's a ton of work for people who are (I suspect) not making a lot of money and operating this site more for their own personal enjoyment.
Images might often be in breach of copyright and therefore illegal, but only about as illegal as crossing the street half a second after the light starts blinking red, or downloading that episode of Cromartie High School starring Freddie Mercury from an obscure Spanish .xyz website. I've done both of those and have yet to face trial for my atrocities (touch wood). It's worth keeping in mind, I suppose, especially if you're concerned about the moral implications, but to say one shouldn't do it solely for the tiny likelihood of legal repercussions is perhaps too strong. In fact, copyright is so widely ignored on the Internet that if I were trying to behave perfectly within the law, I would not trust any online image. A source might offer an image under Creative Commons, but who's to say that source did not, in turn, steal the image from elsewhere? After all, they would have no compelling reason to fear legal repercussions, either. On another note, what would happen if someone were to (attempt to) take a copyright dispute to court without issuing a DMCA takedown notice? Would their case be weakened by having failed to officially notify the defendant? Alternatively, if a DMCA was issued and we were to remove the image, could they then escalate it to court even though their demands were met? The current CHYOA policy is infallible except in those situations, as far as I can tell.
The way DMCA works is that they notify the site, the site takes it down and informs the user, and the user can contest it or not. If they don't contest it, nothing more happens.
AFAIK, service providers (e.g. a website operator) can choose from two different options. 1. The copyright owner sends a DMCA notice to the service provider. If the notice requirements are satisfied, the service provider removes the allegedly infringing content. The service provider then informs the user who published the content. Then, the user can send a counter-notice. If it provides the necessary information, the service provider informs the copyright owner who then has some time to file a lawsuit against the user. If they don't, the service provider reverses the removal of the allegedly infringing content. 2. The copyright owner sends a DMCA notice to the service provider. If the notice requirements are satisfied, the service provider removes the allegedly infringing content. The service provider then informs the user who published the content. Then, the user can sue the copyright owner. What option is used is specified in the service provider's DMCA policy. I have no idea if the copyright owner can sue a user instead of or in addition to a DMCA notice.
They can, but since the only reasonable outcome they could expect is the removal of the infringing content, there is no reason they wouldn't issue a DMCA takedown notice to the site instead.
