Content CreationContent MarketingImagesSEO

Guidelines for using copyrighted images474

dzflower453 private msg quote post Address this user
I had a question. So when you take pictures from Google and save them on your computer by renaming them, does Google still recognize it as a borrowed image and indexes it lower?
Post 1 • IP   flag post
Belew private msg quote post Address this user

Yes. You cannot use someone else's images unless you give credit and you have permission to do so.
Post 2 • IP   flag post
Rev private msg quote post Address this user
You don't always have to give credit. That's a factor of the licensing. But it is always nice to do so.

You can use public domain images in any way you want -- even selling them or adding them to something (like a book) you sell. The important thing is to be SURE they are PD or you can find yourself in the proverbial pickle.

I'm not really sure of the value/purpose of Google Images since it does serve to temp people to use those images as if they are free. They are not and you need to be really careful about which ones you use.

Instead, find some good image repositories that offer PD, or free, or licensed images for you to use. Be sure you understand the licensing and what you are allowed to do.

Here's a book cover we produced recently. The image cost just $1 to license for the purpose. I'm invested but I kind of like the way the ear and ruff of the tiger wraps onto the spine and a little onto the back cover of the book.

Post 3 • IP   flag post
MichaelProcopio private msg quote post Address this user
There is a way to use Google safely. In the image below you'll see how you can select search tools and usage rights.

You can select the license type you need. The most liberal is the first "Labeled for reuse". That license allows you to make money from whatever you are using it for.

Post 4 • IP   flag post
dzflower453 private msg quote post Address this user
Thanks for all the information.
1. Can you clarify what PD means?

Also, if we take images and alter them by adding meme words or photoshopping them, does Google treat that as a new picture?
Post 5 • IP   flag post
Steve private msg quote post Address this user
Here is a link to an article you might find interesting, this person used an image from Google on a blog post ... and see what happened.
Post 6 • IP   flag post
Rev private msg quote post Address this user

PD, in my post above, refers to Public Domain, a term applied to published material (text, images, video, etc.) that is, in essence owned by the public at large or, some might say, by nobody. Public domain materials may be used by anyone for any purpose. They may be used, including distributed and/or sold, as is, incorporated into other works, including works which, as a whole, are copyright. The public domain portions, however, may not be copyright and, contrary to what some suggest, including public domain material in an otherwise copyright work does not negate the copyright.

It needs to be clear; I am not a lawyer nor is the above legal advice. It is only my personal opinion. For accurate representation you need to seek the advice of a lawyer or solicitor. One with copyright/trademark experience is the best choice in this regard.
Post 7 • IP   flag post
Rev private msg quote post Address this user

I don't know whether Google treats a picture differently if a) the file name is changed, or b) the picture is altered, but what Google does or does not do has nothing to do with copyright. If the picture was copyright before you changed the name or altered the image, it is still copyright when you are done -- and by the original copyright owner. I'm not sure about renaming, but altering is, in itself, sufficient to infringe copyright. And it seems logical that in order to rename it you have to download a copy so that too would not be allowed.

I am always surprised to find how many people really don't understand what copyright means. It is, as it says, the RIGHT to COPY and no one has the right to copy in any fashion a copyright work unless they are the copyright own or have the copyright owner's direct permission. Stating the copyright or placing some other acknowledgement or disclaimer does not abrogate one's responsibility. In fact, I suspect it goes to the proof of guilt.

Again, this is just my opinion. See my note above.

Also, check out for factual information on the subject.
Post 8 • IP   flag post
24991 8 8