clyde

Stealing

Recommended Posts

As a new game-maker, I'm still trying to figure out what my personal ethics are when it comes to the process of making and distributing games. I thought it would be useful to have a thread where we can talk about questionable practices. Not necessarily to legitimize them by convincing others, but I see the need for a place to collect and respond to perspectives on these issues.
Even though I am a bit of a douchebag, I'm mostly holding it in. I'm certainly interested in not causing anyone harm, but my views of what constitutes harm often defers from the views of the person with whom I am taking liberties; that's douchebaggery. I think it will be useful to have a place to express douchebag fantasies and get some feedback that might make us reconsider our desires or accept our imperfections.

So, let's get started. How do y'all feel about cropping images out of a Google image-search and using them in a game without asking anyone for permission? The only deterrent I currently face is fear of legal action. As far as my personal ethics go, I'm totally fine with it. I'm also okay with taking photos of people in public and putting them in my game without asking them if it's ok. That's probably a douchey thing to do, but my current thoughts are that folks who aren't okay with it are unreasonably afraid. I have a hard time with working around what I consider to be the unreasonable fears of others. At the same time, I recognize that I have no ability to account for the reasonability of fears more than someone else. It's complex. I just want to steal images and sounds and words and do whatever I want with them and give no one credit.

 

Edit:

Here is a web game that I am using to explore the topic.

Appropriation (fixed 2015-4-7)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just don't sell the game with it. If you use it for freeware, it may be illegal, but its not immoral on my scale. That's true for most people I think. Better to have a finished game with stolen art than nothing at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a new game-maker, I'm still trying to figure out what my personal ethics are when it comes to the process of making and distributing games. I thought it would be useful to have a thread where we can talk about questionable practices. Not necessarily to legitimize them by convincing others, but I see the need for a place to collect and respond to perspectives on these issues.

Even though I am a bit of a douchebag, I'm mostly holding it in. I'm certainly interested in not causing anyone harm, but my views of what constitutes harm often defers from the views of the person with whom I am taking liberties; that's douchebaggery. I think it will be useful to have a place to express douchebag fantasies and get some feedback that might make us reconsider our desires or accept our imperfections.

So, let's get started. How do y'all feel about cropping images out of a Google image-search and using them in a game without asking anyone for permission? The only deterrent I currently face is fear of legal action. As far as my personal ethics go, I'm totally fine with it. I'm also okay with taking photos of people in public and putting them in my game without asking them if it's ok. That's probably a douchey thing to do, but my current thoughts are that folks who aren't okay with it are unreasonably afraid. I have a hard time with working around what I consider to be the unreasonable fears of others. At the same time, I recognize that I have no ability to account for the reasonability of fears more than someone else. It's complex. I just want to steal images and sounds and words and do whatever I want with them and give no one credit.

 

So would you be ok with someone taking image of you and using it for anything?  Think through all the possibilities here.  It's not about fear of public representation, it's fear of public MIS-representation.

 

As for just copying assets, don't expect to monetize it then it should be fine.  Else don't be mad if people do the same with your game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So would you be ok with someone taking image of you and using it for anything? Think through all the possibilities here. It's not about fear of public representation, it's fear of public MIS-representation.

If they did something that was hateful, then I would have a problem with it because (whatever the reason that it is hateful). My problem would be that it was hateful, not that they did it without permission or compensation. But if they cast me as a villian or sex-object without providing reimbursent, I'd be cool with it. I know that other people feel differently. I want to examine the concerns of misrespresentation so that I can decide how I feel about them myself. The contemporary mores on this issue are really far away from my own. There are so many double-standards and superstitious methods to avoid complaints that I think it's a mess that needs to be waded through. I suspect that there is middle-ground between always asking for permission and doing whatever I want in spite, for my personal ethics on the issue so I'm trying to figure out what that middle-ground is.

As for just copying assets, don't expect to monetize it then it should be fine.

This seems to be the going assumption, but I don't think it's very accurate. Let's Plays monetize their videos. Musician's sell tracks that include samples. Is all this just a matter of enforcement? If so then I can start thinking of it in terms of the benefits weighed by legal punishments.

Else don't be mad if people do the same with your game.

I would be thrilled. I know other people are not like me though.

It really is more confusing than it first appears. If I screenshot and crop a vlogger and put them in my game is that unethical? What if I draw over them and only use their contour. What if I use their bedroom as a background? Can I sample their laugh for a sound-effect? What if I want to make a game about a restaraunt I frequent, but the owner is never there because it is a fast-food franchise and they say "no" anyway? Can I put a house from the real-estate ad in my game? Can I have that house be on fire in the game? I haven't yet heard a good blanket-policy for these questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided that this is too interesting not to make a game about.

This is in development. Your input on what I have so far would be useful.

 

Appropriation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it just sounds like you and I share completely different personal ethics.

 

I haven't yet heard a good blanket-policy for these questions


You have, you just don't want to bother with it :P

 

Ask for permission (not that hard), if they say no or don't answer (most likely), go with satirical reference (look-a-like).

 

Unless you are doing educational/documentary/etc. (obviously news coverage doesn't need to ask 'permission' to refer to someone by their name).  But for fiction, go with above.  If you don't want to bother, well then I have nothing else to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it just sounds like you and I share completely different personal ethics.

 

You have, you just don't want to bother with it :P

 

Ask for permission (not that hard), if they say no or don't answer (most likely), go with satirical reference (look-a-like).

 

I can't tell if you are responding to my post or to the playable I posted.

I should mention that my personal feelings on these matters is influenced by the belief that people want more credit and power than is reasonable. For instance, it seems absurd to me that paparazzi take candid photos of celebrities and then enforce copyright claims on the resulting media. Someone saying that I shouldn't do something is not a convincing claim in itself for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't tell if you are responding to my post or to the playable I posted.

 

Post.  I tried the playable but the image broke after the first low res question (or was that the intended image?).

 

Edit: Ok re-loading the image, dude if this is seriously what you wanted to discuss then you should get far less trollish OP (which read more like "I want to copy "insert famous IP" and just rip all the assets of my game after it").  Obviously the idea of 'reference-vs-copying' gets murky as heck when the designs get into the area of these generic patterns or objects.

 

I suggest that at the very least, that web-game be linked in OP.

 

Edit2: It really broke after the 2nd image this time, won't go forward or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit2: It really broke after the 2nd image this time, won't go forward or anything.

 

What an embarassment.

I'll work on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got through more of it (breaking seems random) so with your web-game in mind, yes, it's a complex question whether something should be 'protected/respected' as IP or not, and the examples given in that web-game, IMO, falls outside of the protection because all of them just seem so generic.  With that game in mind, your posts read like genuine critical questions (as they are) than trollbait that I thought they were :P

 

Now if you were to throw in Sanic (intentional spelling) fanart into the mix, that would get really murky IMO as it's something of a product of iconic character and social meme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it weird that you're saying, "this is probably a douchey thing to do but" and then reasons why you think it's okay. Do you not think it's douchey, or do you just think you're a person who's okay with doing douchey things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it weird that you're saying, "this is probably a douchey thing to do but" and then reasons why you think it's okay. Do you not think it's douchey, or do you just think you're a person who's okay with doing douchey things?

I am a person who is okay with doing some douchey things.

Edit: sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping to write a longer more coherent response to this on my laptop later, but this will have to do for now.

I'm surprised that you can ask this question as someone who cares about social justice and feminism. Particularly I'm addressing the idea of using a photo of a stranger/their face. It does also apply to people's work, though that's often less personal and less invasive.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory but the mindset of taking something because the people you're taking it from have no logical reason to be upset is aggressively male and insensitive. It's not the job of other people to justify their discomfort with what you're doing. You can't just view other people through the lens of your own mind and feelings. But you also can't just presume to know that their feelings are mostly in a small range of unnecessary fear and discard them on that basis.

To be fair, you obviously acknowledge that it's shitty and that's why you're asking the question but it's more shitty to take the tact that you'll do it unless it's proven wrong to you instead of the other way around.

I know you're making generally small games that don't have a lot allotted for you to work on them but it's not hard to stick to stuff explicitly marked as free for non commercial use. There's a large contingent of it online. If you can't find the particular thing you want, you either accept it, make it yourself or pay for it yourself. You're not entitled to an asset you want, it's your job to obtain it ethically as a creator.

Basically, you know it's immoral so stop looking for justification for ignoring that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, stealing photos is obviously not ok for ethical and legal reasons (unless we're talking about permissive licenses, fair use etc of course).

 

There is one more thing to consider: your reputation. Even if you won't do much harm by stealing photos, someone may notice and you may be (rightfully) labeled as a scummy developer, which is not an easy label to get rid of.

 

Also I agree with SMB, you assumptions are quite douchebaggy. You just assume the only reason people might object is their unreasonable fear. It's problematic on three levels:

 

- You assume that it's ok to dismiss people's unreasonable fear.

- You assume that the fear is obviously unreasonable.

- You assume that fear is the only reason people would not be ok with stealing their photos.

 

I don't think I have to provide counter-examples to this points. As a wise Steven Seagal movie character once said, "Assumption is the mother of all fuckups".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping to write a longer more coherent response to this on my laptop later, but this will have to do for now.

 

I appreciative of your willingness to share a difference of opinion on this issue. This goes for everyone else in this thread also. It's nice to have a place where I can find people who have very strong opinions that are different than my own strong opinions and who are willing to tell me about them. 

 

I'm surprised that you can ask this question as someone who cares about social justice and feminism. Particularly I'm addressing the idea of using a photo of a stranger/their face. It does also apply to people's work, though that's often less personal and less invasive.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory but the mindset of taking something because the people you're taking it from have no logical reason to be upset is aggressively male and insensitive. It's not the job of other people to justify their discomfort with what you're doing. You can't just view other people through the lens of your own mind and feelings. But you also can't just presume to know that their feelings are mostly in a small range of unnecessary fear and discard them on that basis.

To be fair, you obviously acknowledge that it's shitty and that's why you're asking the question but it's more shitty to take the tact that you'll do it unless it's proven wrong to you instead of the other way around.

 

 

My interest in social justice and feminism greatly inform how I feel about these issues, but obviously I am coming to different conclusions in some cases. This is largely because I don't make all of my decisions and craft my personal ethics from social justice and feminism alone. My views are heavily influenced by my personal desires to create and exist as the things and purposes with which I identify. My views on property-rights have a huge impact on how I view these issues. 

Using a stranger's face is not as binary as you want to claim. 

This fellow routinely walks through Seoul with his camera, asking no one for permission to use their face.

 

While I can see how being knowledgable about feminism and social-justice can help the artist determine where to point the camera, how long of a shot to take, and which doors to enter; I don't personally find this walking-video unethical. I find it both valuable, worthwhile, and simultaneously douchey.

I certainly understand why one would want to assume the worst when discussing permissions and hypotheticals, but it's worthwhile to consider more breadth in the spectrum of ethics. I know that I appear trollish and inflammatory, but this is largely because I have a pretty good idea on where my limits lie on the ethical spectrum and I'm trying to ask questions that are a little bit before and a little bit after my personal threshold (because that is the interesting part for me). We can't consider these issues in absolutes because if we do, then we have to admit that we break these rules all the time, or start lying to ourselves about it. While I often go out of my way to listen to people's concerns and fears, I certainly don't stop doing something simply because someone doesn't like what I'm doing. I don't know what y'all's surrounding populace is like, but in my circumstances I'm witness to conflicting beliefs of what is permissable and what is not on a daily basis. Y'all act like there is consensus, but there is not. 

 

I know you're making generally small games that don't have a lot allotted for you to work on them but it's not hard to

 stick to stuff explicitly marked as free for non commercial use. There's a large contingent of it online. If you can't find the particular thing you want, you either accept it, make it yourself or pay for it yourself. You're not entitled to an asset you want, it's your job to obtain it ethically as a creator.

 

I don't think I'm entitled to use whatever I like, nor do I think that others are entitled to not have me use their assets as an absolute blanket-policy. Which party am I wronging if I use fan-art of a well-known IP in my game? While my personal ethics do often respect property-rights, they also attempt to destroy  rent-seeking. I have a lot of other views on this matter when considering who owns ideas and thoughts and derivatives of them. I think the difference between our view-points might have a lot to do with how I am considering how intellectual property-rights constrain expression along with how it can encourage it. 

 

Basically, you know it's immoral so stop looking for justification for ignoring that.

 

This is offensive, but that's ok. What I'm finding out from bringing this issue up is that people seem to assume that everyone knows what is right and wrong and that we are all in silent consensus, but this is not the case. While some people are saying "Oh just don't sell it and you are not doing anything wrong" others say " stick to stuff explicitly marked as free for non commercial use". This is a taboo subject that needs to be explored. Your suggestion that I shouldn't question or explore what is determining the ethics of these practices is really lazy and presumptive. I don really appreciate your input and hope you continue to contribute to the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, stealing photos is obviously not ok for ethical and legal reasons (unless we're talking about permissive licenses, fair use etc of course).

 

The ethics of it is not clear to me. 

 

There is one more thing to consider: your reputation. Even if you won't do much harm by stealing photos, someone may notice and you may be (rightfully) labeled as a scummy developer, which is not an easy label to get rid of.

 

I think discussions such as this one can have an effect on what is considered scummy and what is considered rebellious. But I agree, my reputation is a valuable thing to me. That's why I want to consider many angles on this confusing and controversial issue.

 

Also I agree with SMB, you assumptions are quite douchebaggy. You just assume the only reason people might object is their unreasonable fear. It's problematic on three levels:

 

- You assume that it's ok to dismiss people's unreasonable fear.

- You assume that the fear is obviously unreasonable.

- You assume that fear is the only reason people would not be ok with stealing their photos.

 

Re-reading my original post, I can see how you came to this conclusion. I wrote that portion poorly, it doesn't really express how I feel about it. What I mean to say is that I respect some fears and concerns that people have about having their photos taken and used while I do not respect other sincerely held fears and concerns. I'm trying to think of an example. Ugh. I should really stick to scenerios that I am actually deliberating over. The biggest problem isn't that I want to walk up to someone, snap their portrait and then use it as a dart-board or urinal-cake. The problem I often run into is that I take a photo of a building or crowd and then see an individual in the photo who I want to use after the fact. I think that taking screenshots of folks in Youtube videos and using those is a similar situation.

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: 

I didn't want to make three posts in a row so I'm going to put the relevant link here:

Check out what's going on with 8bitBonfire

 

I didn't ask them for permission to use their experience in a controversial thread. I would consider my actions as both douchey and fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clyde, in your original post you claimed you'd like to just use any image (or sound) you can lay your hands on without caring about anything and giving any credit to anyone. Such a strong claim understandably caused some strong reactions, which you then used as a proof there is a clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work, which is not true and nobody said that. Of course it's a complicated issue without clear binary good/bad answers and there is an interesting discussion to be had. I think the way this thread started is quite unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clyde, in your original post you claimed you'd like to just use any image (or sound) you can lay your hands on without caring about anything and giving any credit to anyone. Such a strong claim understandably caused some strong reactions, which you then used as a proof there is a clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work, which is not true and nobody said that. Of course it's a complicated issue without clear binary good/bad answers and there is an interesting discussion to be had. I think the way this thread started is quite unfortunate.

I just reread the last line of my original post with this comment in mind. I wasn't being clear again. When I wrote that last line it was in as a sighing whine. As in "Ugh... I just want to steal images and sounds and words and do whatever I want with them and give no one credit (but I can't because everyone has all these concerns I don't agree with)." Obviously, your reading is far more likely. I'm not saying that I'm going to do it, or that I'm doing it. I'm expressing that I feel unecessarily limited by the idea that I have to default to the concerns of anyone else involved with an sound or image.

I don't understand what you are saying here though "Such a strong claim understandably caused some strong reactions, which you then used as a proof there is a clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work, which is not true and nobody said that."

I assume you meant "..., which you then used as a proof there is no clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work".

I take Gaizokubanoa's claim that there is a good blanket-policy and Super Biased Man's claim that I know it's immoral (and I'm just trying to justify it) are both referencing a consensus that does not exist.

Sorry that the way the thread started bothers you, but I still don't think we are in agreement about this stuff. I get the impression that I feel much more limited by the current paradigm in the ethics of appropriation than some of you in this thread. From my view, game-making is way behind, probably because of the crazy amount of commercial influence in comparison to other art forms. Sound-sampling and covers in music is astoundingly more liberal when you compare it to games. The same could be said of cinema, writing and image-creation. It's not like I'm just making up concerns. Look at that comment on Polygon, this a really common concern that is keeping people from creatively interacting with their world and I'm not satisfied by suggestions that I should just do what I want and be quiet about it (not sell it) or that there isn't a problem and that the cultural pressure to not appropriate images by default isn't doing any damage. I can't tell if y'all are aware of distinctions which make sense out of this stuff or if you just ignore massive double-standards of how some art is considered copyable while other art is unethical to copy. Or how some people are fine to photograph without their permission and appropriate the images of, while doing so to others is supposedly inarguably immoral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look like anyone pointed this out, but copyright infringement (or plagiarism) is not stealing.

Of the 3 bad actions you list, plagiarism is by far the worst, followed by disrespecting people's private life.

Taking somebody's work and not giving them credit is just an extreme asshole move, you have nothing to lose to give credit where credit is due.

Not asking people for permission to take their photo and use is just lazy and deteriorates the freedom of passing through public space.

 

Infringing copyright,... meh. If you are just "sampling" and not copying complete works I see it as enriching the culture, and that's a good thing. Sadly modern copyright law, written by huge content owners, do not like additions to culture unless they can monetize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, I'm not trying to argue absolute truths but I am arguing that you are on what I consider to be the opposite default of where you should be. To me, your stance is the idea of "guilty unless proven innocent". Essentially "I'll take this unless someone compels me not to". Or at least, I read it more like that at first.

 

The sexism point I was trying to make is that by and large men are taught that the world is there to take. Grab it by the horns and run with it. That is exactly what you're doing when you decide to take other people's stuff without deciding to concern yourself with their consent. I'm not saying that you can never take it because it's never acceptable, I'm saying that your default behaviour should be to actually request it. In the days of the internet, that's not hard. You see an image you want? Reverse image search to find who it's of or who made it. What's odd is, it sounded a bit like you said that you don't always use social justice to guide your decisions (which is perfectly fine) but then said that sometimes you just decide to be selfish and unethical because you want to? I'm not sure if I read that right, it's a little unclear what part of my posts you agree with but are morally willing to ignore and what parts you feel differently on (eg. I do get the impression that you generally disagree with people retaining ownership of items)

 

I have to note that there's a significant difference between usage, reference and commentary. Usage is taking something someone made (a texture, a photograph) as part of your work, you may alter it a small amount but essentially their work is being used by you. This is where I consider permission most important, because you're taking something of value to that person and using it to add value to something of yours. Their value might be in the fact that it's a picture they drew or that it's a photograph of them that they inherently consider intimate. The source of the value is irrelevant, they value it and it's important to respect that. This is not necessarily capitalist value, just some value they have placed on it that means you should respect their ownership over your desire.

 

Reference is mostly for academic/informative discussion, where you want to refer to something someone else has made because it has merit to the discussion and adds more for you to talk about (for example, the quote on Polygon... even though the link didn't work for me). I consider it more polite to get permission here, though not entirely necessary in the same way. Because so often this involves citing a source (even in casual conversation) and a clear boundary of what you have created and what is someone else's work. You're already showing respect to them by essentially drawing a circle around their contribution and distinguishing it.

 

Commentary then is mostly for satire and parody. Where the idea is that you're intentionally drawing upon other work in order to make a point about it. It's almost a mix of the other two, both a discussion/argument and a work you're making. It usually has no room for either clearly delineating the author of the work you're commenting on but at the same time you generally can't ask for permission either since criticism is common in this form, plus an affectionate parody can be misread as biting. I do feel like, given the limited options available, it's ok to be a douche here on the basis that you're attempting to contribute something real that requires you disregard the value that the author originally holds.

 

Another metric in this mix, is that personally I am less concerned with respecting the value of those who have more value in total. So I'm not worried about taking something from Disney (ethically, I might worry legally even if it's free). While a small time tumblr artist very much deserves my respect. Likewise, a random person who just posted a photo online of themself deserves a lot of respect for something they don't even consider a work so much as a personal item.

 

I am still unclear on your exact stance on this since you've said you pushed a little either side of your true feelings, but honestly the devaluing of artist's work was not the crux of the matter for me. It was that you seemed to be saying that you don't respect the value other people place onto their own digital possessions. I think that's deeply unfair to them. I know you want to create things but I can't see it as anything but selfish to decide it's more important to make them to even attempt to get permission. With small games, it literally just takes a few emails. I don't know if you're impatient to work without waiting, you expect they'll just say no or just don't feel compelled to make the effort but it's just the opposite of my mentality.

 

I don't see us as on opposite sides of a binary fence, I think we're on opposite ends of a scale by default though we're willing to move around the scale plenty. What I find odd (and reacted poorly too) was that you seemed to suggest that you do consider your end of the scale to be less ethical (though maybe not as much as I do) but you reside there out of personal convenience.

 

I don really appreciate your input and hope you continue to contribute to the discussion.

 

Also I hope that was a type of 'do' and not 'don't'. :P

 

Also also, I wrote that last post at 6am on my phone on a bus and haven't really gotten to proofreread it. If any of it was confusing or unclear please highlight it and I can try clear it up when I have time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was definately a "do".

Good post SBM, I still disagree with you a lot on the digital-media issue but it's interesting to see how you come to your personal ethics.

One thing I want to clarify (not because you misunderstood me, but because it's worth explaining a little further). I do consider myself of the leaning towards the less ethical side, that is correct. So think of it like I'm aware of social limits, but I don't agree with a lot of them, so I feel compelled to push and poke. I'm this way in many areas. A really good example is that I think graffitti is generally progressive, but I think it's unethical to cover the numbers on train-cars, fronts of businesses, homes, cars, or windows. Is it a douchey thing to spray-paint a picture on the sidewalk? Yup, but I think its worth doing. Not to get too far off topic on that, but one weird thing I found out is.... Well I put some art up once, like these pretty figures in cloaks with crowns and such. The next week it had MS-13 written across it. I didn't think that was progressive or cool. But it was because the issue wasn't about expression, it was about threats and territory.

Back to pushing towards the unethical. Something I seem to notice more than others is that consensus kills a lot of initiative and creativity. It does take energy to get consensus and when you don't, it's incredibly demoralizing. I see the need for it when I'm sharing communal space or resources, but with images? I feel that I am unnecessarily burdened and stifled by credit-concerns. Maybe I should start asking for permission, noting how much time and energy goes into that and come back to this thread to give a report. I might meet some artists that way. That doesn't settle the discussion though. Your types of image uses are something I want to address later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, I'm not trying to argue absolute truths but I am arguing that you are on what I consider to be the opposite default of where you should be. To me, your stance is the idea of "guilty unless proven innocent". Essentially "I'll take this unless someone compels me not to". Or at least, I read it more like that at first.

 

This is correct. I want to just go onto youtube, capture gifs, put them in my game. Take sound samples in similar ways, not be bothered with trying to give credit to or get permission from everyone involved in the media or the technologies I use until someone explains to me why it is unethical in a way that I agree with. To be clear, I already have had people present arguments about ethics that already have a role in determining what I do. But in the most basic form of what I describe, I can not think of an ethical argument which has compelled me to think that this is something I don't want to do or a person whom I don't want to be. Since we have been assuming worse-case scenarios and that has distracted us a bit from useful discussion, let's consider banal ones instead. 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/tyrano/2015-4-4-Duchess/index.html

I made this game in about 4-5 hours. I captured the dog gif from a Youtube video that was a compilation of other people's funny dog videos. I didn't attempt to ask for permissions from Youtube, the compiled-video uploader, the original video uploader, the owner of the dog, gif-cam, Gimp or TyranoBuilder. And it is important to consider not only the media, but the tools too; I don't see why some should get credit while others would not. 

The photo of the woman was cropped from a photo I found on Google search. I didn't attempt to contact the woman, the publisher of the photo, the photographer, or the other tools I'v already mentioned that I used. 

The background photo is of my dad. I didn't ask him for permission or even tell him that he is in a game (but I got compliments about him so now I will). I didn't credit or attempt to credit any of the fabric-designers in any of the photos nor the people that run the textile-machines. I expect that some of y'all may think that I'm being absurd and hyperbolic by suggesting that textile designers might should be credited, but if it is absurd, then I want to hear why it is significantly different than the other people involved getting their due credit.

I am not defaulting towards an intentional obscuring of the labor or existences for which I am grateful, I'm defaulting towards convenience. I would go on Shutterstock and use a bunch of their stuff without removing water-marks if I didn't think I wouldn't get sued or take-down notices. I wouldn't remove it because it would be convenient not to (unless I had some sort of need to remove it I suppose, it depends on the game). I wouldn't use nude photos of Katniss that were hacked out of her phone regardless of convenience, because I have heard ethical arguments that have compelled me not to do that.  

 

 

The sexism point I was trying to make is that by and large men are taught that the world is there to take. Grab it by the horns and run with it. That is exactly what you're doing when you decide to take other people's stuff without deciding to concern yourself with their consent. I'm not saying that you can never take it because it's never acceptable, I'm saying that your default behaviour should be to actually request it. In the days of the internet, that's not hard. You see an image you want? Reverse image search to find who it's of or who made it.

 

I didn't know that reverse-image search existed. That's useful info. 

 

What's odd is, it sounded a bit like you said that you don't always use social justice to guide your decisions (which is perfectly fine) but then said that sometimes you just decide to be selfish and unethical because you want to? I'm not sure if I read that right, it's a little unclear what part of my posts you agree with but are morally willing to ignore and what parts you feel differently on (eg. I do get the impression that you generally disagree with people retaining ownership of items)

 

Yeah, my decision-making is a lot more complex than "Does this promote sexism and white-supremacy?" There are a lot of other factors. The same is true for my environmentalism. I like to have these perspectives available so that I can consider a much larger breadth of my responsibilities, but ultimately I'm going to make a decision that I think is best for myself and those near me (once I have included how my decision will impact the sustainability of the planet, the progress towards equality for all people in the best way that I know how, that I also have time for). I still drive a car and I'm going to accept an easy, high-paying job even if I know that having a woman of color in that position will move society in the direction I want to see it go.

Retaining ownership of digital images is absurd to me. 

 

I have to note that there's a significant difference between usage, reference and commentary. Usage is taking something someone made (a texture, a photograph) as part of your work, you may alter it a small amount but essentially their work is being used by you. This is where I consider permission most important, because you're taking something of value to that person and using it to add value to something of yours. Their value might be in the fact that it's a picture they drew or that it's a photograph of them that they inherently consider intimate. The source of the value is irrelevant, they value it and it's important to respect that. This is not necessarily capitalist value, just some value they have placed on it that means you should respect their ownership over your desire.

 

But all they are losing is absolute control over all instances of that image, that's something that they never had anyway. It's more likely that we both gain something if someone uses my image I get excited about it rather than pissed off. Why am I so different? I just don't understand. 

 

Another metric in this mix, is that personally I am less concerned with respecting the value of those who have more value in total. So I'm not worried about taking something from Disney (ethically, I might worry legally even if it's free). While a small time tumblr artist very much deserves my respect.

 

I'm definately going to put an instance of a well-know character in the Appropriation game and then include a piece of fan-art of that character. It's so weird to me that someone would think that the person who made the fan-art is harmed more than the commercial entity that paid for the character to be developed and disseminated. I hope to provoke thoughts on that exact comparison.

 

Likewise, a random person who just posted a photo online of themself deserves a lot of respect for something they don't even consider a work so much as a personal item.

 

Do you believe this for reasons that were not included in your post? It sounds like you are fine with using and altering commerically created things, but not ones created without commercial purpose. Is that the case?

 

 

Edit:

So I used reverse search and I think I found an email that would be at the plantation where the Sri Lankan woman works. I sent them this.

 

 

 

I made a short free game for fun. I used a photo of a woman who I think may work with you. 

Can you ask this lady if she is ok with having her photo in this game?

-- 

-clyde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like making credits pages for my games, it makes me feel like I am on a team even though I work alone. =P I usually only use CC-BY licensed stuff or public domain stuff though, so if I do contact them it's just for a "thanks for that thing of yours I used...in my game...playmygame..." instead of trying to get permission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally my biggest problem with using what's not yours or freely given (and putting something online does not equal freely given) is that you're effectively saying that you own or made that thing. Which while I appreciate that is not your intention, it is what it will seem like and is crappy no matter what way you look at it plus it comes across as very lazy.

You can put in a disclaimer to say "I found all this stuff online" but people won't be taking you seriously if you do. To be honest they probably won't anyway with cut and paste photos. I don't wish to offend but I respect the crappiest MS Paint art more than even the best use of acquired photos because it shows that even if the creator isn't great at making art that they put themselves out there and made their own thing.

 

So don't steal because yes is crappy but also because if you don't then you can have something that you can truly be proud of and put and unqualified stamp on to say "this is my thing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now