I've been using https://pixabay.com/ lately and it seems to work out well. The site claims the images are free to use for commercial use, so I've felt safe using them here, especially if I modify them a bit (because, you know, everything needs the Steemit logo).
What are your thoughts on how much an image needs to be modified before it would be classified as new art?
Yeap that's what I use. This posts image is from Pixabay.
Classified as new art? hm.... that's a hard one. Personally from scratch or you would atleast need to provide info that it's a modification of the original work.
challenge. I found the image online and dropped in the logo. Did I steal? Did I create a new original work? I'm not really sure, but I feel like it's okay.I was thinking along the lines of editing an existing work by dropping in the Steemit logo. As an example. I did that with the #bitcoinpizza
pixabay is really great, and I'd been using it exclusively, but my wife recently showed me Pexels and I've found the quality of the images to be much higher, for the same commercial license.
Cool, I'll check it out. Thanks!
Great tip about Pexels, thanks.
Wow thanks, sometime i feel like an idiot when i didn't know about something so obvious :)
Definitely checking it out, thanks a ton!
Under the old copyright paradigm, that's always up to the judge presiding over the copyright suit to decide.
Happens all the time in the music industry where other records are frequently sampled, and then used in an altered form. The judge (who knows nothing about the music, or the technology) looks at it, and looks at it, lawyers argue about it for a few months (everyone's getting paid $250/hr if not more) , and then the judge says "ok, it's ... new art". Or "it's infringing".
The entire thing is just a mindboggling pile of bullshit.
I'm in the software industry and that's generally how many think about software patents. IP laws, to me, are pretty ridiculous. I like Ben Franklin's approach which was basically along the lines of keep innovating and adding value and leave everyone else behind. Anything backed by the coercive force of government is, to me, a bad idea to begin with. Good ideas don't require force.
That said, I also deeply care about original creators and hate to see them being taken advantage of. I hope our technology can provide solutions to provably show (via notarization through the blockchain, maybe?) who the original authors are and reward them accordingly.
The LBRY project are doing some interesting stuff along these lines.
http://LBRY.io
That sounds really cool, thanks for sharing. I've heard a little here or there about it. Nice intro video. I'll keep an eye out for it.
I've been using it too. Another one is https://www.flickr.com/creativecommons. There are different forms of creative commons. I usually use https://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/cc0-1.0/ since you can pretty much do whatever you want with it without worrying (modify, use without attributing, use for commercial purposes, etc.)
Pixababy is awesome. Thanks!