Creating CC Using Others' Artworks
Jun 14, 2019 17:42:43 GMT -5
jwofles, Feyona, and 1 more like this
Post by Pint-Sized Punker on Jun 14, 2019 17:42:43 GMT -5
I'm a graphic designer and illustrator by trade, so this one's going to be a doozy.
Recently I got in touch with an artist, namely Luke Dixon, to see if it was cool if I pulled some of his artwork from his online platforms to use for some decorative CC in TS4. I explained what 'custom content' was and that "actually, yeah, The Sims still exists!" to which he seemed pleasantly surprised. Anyway, I offered full credit in any space that this CC was posted, as well as in-game description boxes. He was pretty chuffed. Still didn't really have a clue what was going on, but chuffed regardless.
This is a simple case of getting written permission from an artist who has taken time out of their lives to produce something for you to enjoy, which you then wish to manipulate in some capacity for your own enjoyment in a virtual space... so why do so few CC creators even attempt to do the same thing?
Not every artist that CC creators contact will get back to them. This is unfortunate but people have lives away from the Internet and will sometimes think you're after something monetary so won't reply, or will simply the query entirely. Such situations shouldn't be taken as a go ahead to use their work (since, well, they never replied!) and certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse for retaliation. Artists don't owe CC creators anything, and vice versa.
From a personal standpoint I'd love it if somebody wanted to use my work for TS4 and would appreciate being contacted first, but would absolutely expect credit irrespective of whether somebody had made that attempt or not. Not crediting artists who make original works is damaging because there is resultantly little way of TS4 audiences who see this work to find a way back to its originator. Yes, people will still see the artworks but not be able to make connections with the artist online, purchase goods should they run a store or follow their progression on social media or their websites.
In the case of Luke, who doesn't necessarily need the additional exposure (he's doing pretty well by himself), not having Sims-folk visit his online spaces won't really be at all damaging. But for a moment let's pretend that this wasn't a well-established artist with an online store that generates decent amounts of money, but instead a small-time newcomer, otherwise unemployed, who desperately needs the exposure? Let's pretend that I pulled this person's work from Google Images or Pinterest or Tumblr.
CC creators often pull trending, pretty-looking images from such spaces all the time to get their content seen with little to no consideration of whether the artist whose work they are using needs a bit of a leg-up. Is a lack of credit not a conclusive lack of thanks to the arts' originator? And, at least to some degree, is it not breaking copyright law dependant on where you live? Even without the idea of putting content behind paywalls (which, if you've used someone else's artwork, is almost definitely illegal regardless of where you are in the world), using artwork in this way smacks of laziness at best and explicit callousness at worst.
Perhaps a counterargument would be "but what about real-world objects that are not credited in any way but still made into CC?", which is fair. This is where the line tends to blur somewhat, as we begin to traverse the realms of mass-production and branding. Do mass-produced and recognisably-branded items, which are turned into CC, require credit to their originator(s)? Well, if they're "recognisably-branded" then perhaps not so much. That said I still see plenty of CC out there based on such items (handbags, trainers/sneakers, furniture etc.) which is not necessarily linked back to any form of online space, but entitled "Furniture-Type-Stuff inspired by IKEA", "Vans Hi-Top Shoes" or otherwise "That Item from That Popular Retailer/Brand/Designer". To some degree, this is still credit; maybe not entirely directly, but still a nod.
So again, if it can be done if only half-heartedly for big brands in an attempt to grab the attention of CC downloaders, why should it not be done for small artists and businesses who are trying to make their mark?
The whole discussion can get very confusing, especially legally, but as an artist myself it makes me uncomfortable to know how easy it is for work to be pulled from the internet anonymously, used in heck-knows-what kind of ways, with little to no care for the originator and how it may make them feel. It would be interesting to see how other people felt about this.
Recently I got in touch with an artist, namely Luke Dixon, to see if it was cool if I pulled some of his artwork from his online platforms to use for some decorative CC in TS4. I explained what 'custom content' was and that "actually, yeah, The Sims still exists!" to which he seemed pleasantly surprised. Anyway, I offered full credit in any space that this CC was posted, as well as in-game description boxes. He was pretty chuffed. Still didn't really have a clue what was going on, but chuffed regardless.
This is a simple case of getting written permission from an artist who has taken time out of their lives to produce something for you to enjoy, which you then wish to manipulate in some capacity for your own enjoyment in a virtual space... so why do so few CC creators even attempt to do the same thing?
Not every artist that CC creators contact will get back to them. This is unfortunate but people have lives away from the Internet and will sometimes think you're after something monetary so won't reply, or will simply the query entirely. Such situations shouldn't be taken as a go ahead to use their work (since, well, they never replied!) and certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse for retaliation. Artists don't owe CC creators anything, and vice versa.
From a personal standpoint I'd love it if somebody wanted to use my work for TS4 and would appreciate being contacted first, but would absolutely expect credit irrespective of whether somebody had made that attempt or not. Not crediting artists who make original works is damaging because there is resultantly little way of TS4 audiences who see this work to find a way back to its originator. Yes, people will still see the artworks but not be able to make connections with the artist online, purchase goods should they run a store or follow their progression on social media or their websites.
In the case of Luke, who doesn't necessarily need the additional exposure (he's doing pretty well by himself), not having Sims-folk visit his online spaces won't really be at all damaging. But for a moment let's pretend that this wasn't a well-established artist with an online store that generates decent amounts of money, but instead a small-time newcomer, otherwise unemployed, who desperately needs the exposure? Let's pretend that I pulled this person's work from Google Images or Pinterest or Tumblr.
CC creators often pull trending, pretty-looking images from such spaces all the time to get their content seen with little to no consideration of whether the artist whose work they are using needs a bit of a leg-up. Is a lack of credit not a conclusive lack of thanks to the arts' originator? And, at least to some degree, is it not breaking copyright law dependant on where you live? Even without the idea of putting content behind paywalls (which, if you've used someone else's artwork, is almost definitely illegal regardless of where you are in the world), using artwork in this way smacks of laziness at best and explicit callousness at worst.
Perhaps a counterargument would be "but what about real-world objects that are not credited in any way but still made into CC?", which is fair. This is where the line tends to blur somewhat, as we begin to traverse the realms of mass-production and branding. Do mass-produced and recognisably-branded items, which are turned into CC, require credit to their originator(s)? Well, if they're "recognisably-branded" then perhaps not so much. That said I still see plenty of CC out there based on such items (handbags, trainers/sneakers, furniture etc.) which is not necessarily linked back to any form of online space, but entitled "Furniture-Type-Stuff inspired by IKEA", "Vans Hi-Top Shoes" or otherwise "That Item from That Popular Retailer/Brand/Designer". To some degree, this is still credit; maybe not entirely directly, but still a nod.
So again, if it can be done if only half-heartedly for big brands in an attempt to grab the attention of CC downloaders, why should it not be done for small artists and businesses who are trying to make their mark?
The whole discussion can get very confusing, especially legally, but as an artist myself it makes me uncomfortable to know how easy it is for work to be pulled from the internet anonymously, used in heck-knows-what kind of ways, with little to no care for the originator and how it may make them feel. It would be interesting to see how other people felt about this.
