Image Attribution Nightmare

Jump to Last Post 1-17 of 17 discussions (152 posts)

70
healthmunstaposted 10 years ago
Well, not exactly "nightmare", but I'm hoping someone can help me out.

I usually get my pictures from freedigitalfotos.net and Wikimedia Commons. For almost all my hubs, what I do is to create collages using these pictures. So one collage can have up to 8 pictures. The boxes under Name and Source, under the Edit Image Capsule have a limit on how many characters they can accept. For example, I can only attribute 2 images out of 8.

Because of this problem, for most of my recent hubs, I used a "catch-all" phrase at the end of my hub, stating, "All images from freedigitalfotos.net". However, today I found out that as per freedigitalfotos ToS, I should be crediting each of the Image Creators individually next to their images! Which makes sense, of course. But what am I to do now? The Name and Source boxes aren't large enough for me to do that....

Looks like I'm going to have to stop creating collages, which I very much LOVE to do! D:
reply report
1. 60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Did you try to copy/paste it into the caption box?
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't try copy/pasting. Does that work? I'll check it out.
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  That is what I do all of the time into the source window. I do not know how long you meant, mine are always too long for the window. You just click on the window and hit 'end' to see the rest. No matter where I get the photos from I have always done it the same way and I have had no problems.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  It doesn't work, btw.
  reply report
2. 0
  Christy Kirwanposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I'm really delighted that you're serious about attributing your photos properly, healthmunsta, and I see that you've received some helpful advice from other Hubbers. You may also want to post a request for a collage photo attribution option in the HubPages Feature Suggestion Forum as well: http://hubpages.com/forum/category/6634
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Christy! Feature suggestion is a great idea - why didn't I think of that?
  reply report
90
Millionaire Tipsposted 10 years ago
You can add a separate text capsule with the attribution information.
reply report
1. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I guess that's a good idea, too.
  reply report
88
Will Apseposted 10 years ago
Do you mean hxxp://www.freedigitalphotos.net/ ?

freedigitalfotos.net has no images that I can find (though you have credited it widely, lol).

Frankly, I would look for a wider range of sources. Try hxxp://www.morguefile.com/ for one. They don't usually require attribution.
reply report
1. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  hxxp://
  
  0.O
  
  Now I'm frumbuzzled.
  
  Lol
  reply report
  88
  Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Copy and paste the URL.
  
  Or select the URL and right click 'go to site'. Exclude the 'hxxp'.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Ok, thank you.
  
  Also thanks for suggesting morguefile. But the reason I was using only one source, freedigitalfotos.net, was so that I could just have one catch-all attribution at the end of my hub. Nevertheless, you've opened my eyes to the fact that I should be using a wider range of sources.
  reply report
  88
  Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You are welcome. I'm off to bake a cake for some blind people now.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, that's really nice of you, Will.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The point Will is making is that there's no such site as freedigitalfotos.net. If you've been crediting that URL, you're not crediting the correct site!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Lol, I understood that later on. I've already started editing my hubs one by one. Luckily, I only 30 hubs to edit. Whew!
  reply report
2. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  By the way, most people properly attributing photos from freedigitalphotos.net, are using credits that go like, "Image courtesy of xyz, freedigitalphotos.net," rather than the whole hxxp://www.freedigitalphotos.net, because that's how the website says it should be attributed:
  "If you use this free image, you must publish an acknowledgement to FreeDigitalPhotos.net and the image creator on the same page or screen where the image is used."
  reply report
3. 75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I stopped using Morguefile due to the fact that you can not use the image unless you alter it...hence the "stand alone" clause in their license which specifically addresses you can not use the image EXACTLY as it is without alteration:
  
  morgueFile license
  You are free:
  Remix - to adapt the work.
  Commercial - to use this work for commercial purposes.
  Without Attribution - to use without attributing the original author.
  
  Under the following conditions:
  Stand alone basis - You can not sell, license, sublicense, rent, transfer or distribute this image exactly as it is without alteration.
  Ownership - You may not claim ownership of this image in its original state.
  reply report
  88
  Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Those statements are so clear it is hardly worth restating them but I suppose I will have to.
  
  Don't pretend that you own the images you find on morguefile.com
  
  Don't try to sell the images you find on morguefile.com
  
  On the other hand, you may sell images that contain reworked elements of morguefile pics.
  
  Their is no need to attribute morguefile pics whatever way you might choose to use them.
  reply report
  75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Your English teacher was different than mine for sure, or English is your second language. I prefer to read the site's words and not what you may think they mean. As you point out, Will, the one who knows all, they are easy to read and understand.
  
  However, if you have questions, do as I have and contact the site owners and they will tell you that you can only freely use altered images.
  
  An afterthought, apparently you have no concept of what "stand alone basis" implies. There is a thing called Google that will help you understand that.
  reply report
  88
  Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You should try not to spread your own confusion to others.
  reply report
  97
  PaulGoodman67posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Will's right. You can use the image for illustrative purposes in a hub. But you cannot *sell* it to someone else (as if it's your own) unless you alter it in a major way so that it's effectively a different image.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I thought exactly the same thing, Will. That's the way it used to be, because I've used many Morguefile photos in the past and I'm positive there was no requirement for attribution.
  
  However I just checked the FAQ on Morguefile, and it's changed. Here's the relevant question:
  
  "What does it mean I have to alter the image.
  
  The morguefile license is specifically for designers and illustrators to use the images in a creative process creating work of their own. If you would like to use the image in a blog post, we recommend contacting the photographer and providing a by line under the photo with the photographer's name. This is generally agreed to be acceptable."
  
  So you now have to contact the photographer if you want to use the image "straight".
  
  And under the original licence information (free to remix etc etc), there's now a new section saying
  
  "Under the following conditions:
  
  Stand alone basis - You can not sell, license, sublicense, rent, transfer or distribute this image exactly as it is without alteration.
  
  Posting it on a blog post is "distribution".
  
  I'm so glad Dale brought this up.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Dale, Will, PaulGoodman67, and Marisa for all of your clarifications. Now you see why a newbie would be confused? You've all been quite helpful. Feel free to point out any mistakes I've made with attribution in my hubs. I'm aware of some and will get to it, one at a time. Going forward, I will use this information for correct image attribution in future hubs and use my own photos when I can.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Well, you can see we're confused too, but that's only because Morguefile has changed its rules!
  
  The rule is really very simple.
  
  1. If you want to use a photo, check to make sure there's a licence permitting you to do so.
  2. If there is, credit the photographer.
  
  You can't go far wrong if you do that. If it's a photo site and the site itself also asks for credit, you can credit the site, but it doesn't have to be in the photo capsule - for instance, if all the photos on a Hub are from Photopin, you'd just put a single link at the end of the Hub, e.g. "Photo credit: all images from Photopin.com".
  
  Just to clarify Morguefile - it used to be a site where you could use any photo without attribution. It's changed now: you can only use the images if you make "derivative work" (i.e. change it in some way). if you want to use the images unchanged, you must email the individual photographer and ask permission, and you will have to attribute to the photographer if they give permission.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Sigh. This is too much. Thank you kindly, Marisa, for your patience and help. I completed my next hub but not published yet. I see now that it STILL may be incorrect since the images are not derivitive although resized. I think I may publish it anyway since it comes as close as good enough can get since I did credit the photographers, the site, and included the image url. Ey-yi-yi.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Where did you get the images from? If Morguefile, then you need to go back to Morguefile and email those photographers individually to ask their permission. They'll probably give it, BUT they will probably ask for attribution, and it's quite likely they'll want to be credited directly, not via Morguefile.
  
  Cropping is not a sufficient alteration. You could create a MFP (Made for Pinterest) image by adding text?
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Lord, MFP hmm? More work. Yes, they are from morguefile. I will go back and find email addresses later. I appreciate it.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If you don't want to change them, then try emailing the photographers first. If you are prepared to change them - maybe make some collages - then you won't need to contact them.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Will do.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: Where do you find the licensing info on Morguefile and Pixabay and how do you find the email address of the photographer?
  
  Also: If I create a made for Pinterest photo with text plus other alterations that is from Morguefile or Pixabay and credit the photographer AND the site, will that do?
  reply report
  88
  Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thx for that, Marisa.
  
  And apologies to Dale. He seems to have got it right.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: Now I am really confused. If you alter the photo and credit the photographer from Morguefile, do you still have to contact the photographer?
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Dale: Could you please take a look at a few of my hubs to see if I am doing this correctly? I often alter the photos, always credit Morguefile but did not know to credit the photographer. Need some help here. Thanks.
  reply report
  75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Once I learned I had to alter the material prior to using it I never used that material. I don't have the ability to alter photos very well, so I went looking elsewhere.
  
  So with that in mind, I really could not evaluate your hubs. Sorry about that.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Dale: Thanks anyhow. If you use the free editing tool picmonkey.com it is very easy to learn how to edit pix...and it's also a lot of fun.
  reply report
  75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks! I do like using such things, but time and patience???? well, I lack in both at times, lol. I may well download that and give it a try however.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  good luck
  reply report
  38
  Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If it takes a second or two to process your edit, the monkey winks.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The essential rule of attribution is that you're giving the photographer credit. If you're not doing that, re-check the site terms again to make absolutely sure you're doing it right! I'm always suspicious of sites that don't require you to credit the photographer, because sometimes they're full of stolen photos (Photobucket is the prime example).
  
  Pixabay says all its photos are public domain, which by definition doesn't require the photographer to be credited.
  
  Each photo site is different but most want credit for their site as well - however that credit doesn't have to be in the capsule (which only clutters things up). You can put the site credit at the end of your Hub - handy if you have several photos and they're all from one site, because you can just say "all photos from ....".
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: Here's the problem as I see it with Morguefile. You cannot credit a photographer if you alter his photo because it then is no longer exactly his photo. If you do not alter it, then you must credit him, get permissions, etc. This seems pretty clear to me. If you read the link I posted here to Pixabay, you see that they advise you to tread carefully with personal rights. Also, the majority of their photos are now those you must purchase, which is why I use very few of them anymore. This is a very slippery slope for all of us, but in Morguefile's case, the rules are quite clear. I just wish they had not changed them or at least given us a date for the change so that we would know what is legal and what is not.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You've got it. I'm sure there are thousands of bloggers (like us!) who have been happily using their photos incorrectly for ages. It's silly of them to think people are going to check the terms if they're an existing user - they should have a notice on the front page alerting people to the correct rules.
  reply report
  38
  Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  There is so much confusing information in this thread! On every photo on the MorgueFile site you will see this permission:
  
  "You are allowed to copy, distribute, transmit the work and to adapt the work. Attribution is not required. You are prohibited from using this work in a stand alone manner."
  
  Can you use a photo from MorgueFile on a Hub without attribution? Yes, absolutely. Do you want to know what 'stand alone' means? Read this explanation from the MorgueFile forum:
  
  http://morguefile.in/community/discussi … -quot-mean
  
  If there is anything else that you do not understand about using MorgueFile photos on HubPages, you can ask for clarification in the MF forum by posting your own thread there.
  reply report
  85
  NateB11posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  This makes sense to me. They don't allow stand alone use, for instance, if someone took one photo and just tried to sell it. But using the photo as part of a long article is okay. That makes more sense to me. I can't imagine why they would only allow use of photos only if they are altered; that explanation seemed not right to me. Makes more sense that they allow use of the photos in a bigger piece like an article in which it's not about the photo but the photo is used in some way to enhance the article. In the quote you use, it says, "You are allowed to copy, distribute, transmit the work AND (my emphasis) to adapt the work." So, not just adapt it, but those others things too.
  reply report
  38
  Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I agree. I use MorgueFile photos on some of my Hubs and I don't attribute them.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  WF, if you look back in this thread, you'll find several of us who said the same thing, but we're now eating our words.
  
  Morguefile has changed its terms of service, some time this year. The new terms are best explained by this quote from their FAQ:
  
  "What does it mean I have to alter the image?
  The morguefile license is specifically for designers and illustrators to use the images in a creative process creating work of their own. If you would like to use the image in a blog post, we recommend contacting the photographer and providing a by line under the photo with the photographer's name. "
  
  I've emailed them for clarification, and also to ask when the change was made. I'm assuming any images I used prior to the change are fine, but I may need to go back and credit images used since then.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Writer Fox: You forgot the rest of the ruling. Read my post below which comes directly from Morguefile.com. To avoid attributes, you must change the photo so that it is not exactly like the one you are using. I believe the reason for this is to remove any liability from the photographer. Pixabay is somewhat similar. You do not have to attribute anything with them no matter how the photo is done, but you DO have to be careful about personal rights issues. I've posted a link from Pixabay which explains everything.
  reply report
77
psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago
Just add a text box at the bottom to credit photographers by name.
reply report
1. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  This would ruin the flow of my hub, but I guess it is the best option...
  reply report
  77
  psycheskinnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If it is at the end and set off in a side box or in italics I think most people will barely notice it. There is already a flurry of advertising in that position. You could combine it with other acknowledgements, citations and references etc etc.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  How could it ruin the flow if it's right at the end?
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The reason why I thought I had a problem was because I usually make collages, and I need to attribute each of the 2 - 8 pictures in the 2 - 4 collages in my hub.
  
  But from this thread, I've got a few ideas, one of which is to use a text box at the end and somehow attribute all the pictures, making it clear which picture belongs to whom. For a collage, this would not be very clear unless I did something like, "Collage 1: Picture of Olive Oil by (creator name) from (website name), Picture of Broccoli by (creator name) from (website name) etc..."
  
  I also realized I'm fretting over image attribution and getting it perfectly right, when most hubbers don't give much of a thought to it. I've seen so many hubbers (even those with over 100K views) using stock images, images from online magazines and not caring to attribute them at all.
  
  I should just do the necessary crediting in a text box or otherwise and stop being overly worried and paranoid about it.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I like that you take attribution seriously. It really annoys me that some Hubbers get their panties in a bunch when someone steals their writing, but they think it's OK to steal a photographer's images!
  
  You do need to attribute each individual photo if it's under a Creative Commons licence, but (as psycheskinner says) it doesn't have to be in the photo capsule. Personally I'd put a Photo Credits text box somewhere and list the links in that. At the very end of the Hub, possibly right-floated, isn't going to be too intrusive IMO.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you, Marisa.
  reply report
90
FlourishAnywayposted 10 years ago
For collages, you might try to use your own images, use images from the same photographer and site (which would streamline multiple attributions), provide a credits capsule perhaps at the end, or use a photo sharing site with looser attribution parameters. Hope this helps you.
reply report
1. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for the tips!
  reply report
2. 68
  relacheposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If the photographer has not given permission to make derivative works, you should not be using hem to create collages.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Do derivative works infringe alterations?
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  "derivative works" means altered images. You have to look at the licence for that particular photo, to know whether it's allowed.
  
  So on Morguefile, for instance, derivative works are the ONLY way you're allowed to use the images, unless you contact the photographer for permission - which is very unusual, possibly unique!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for clearing that, Marisa. From relache's previous post, I thought derivative works and alterations were 2 different things, with collages not being allowed if the photographer does not give rights to create derivative works in specific.
  
  Yes, indeed morguefile seems a bit weird for only allowing altered images. I wonder what the purpose of this is? Do altered images partly or fully disassociate the photographer from whatever material you write? There could be a good reason for morguefile's unique rules.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Morguefile says it's intended for artists and multimedia professionals looking for base material.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  So maybe we need to crop as opposed to resize.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  That's true. You could crop certain angles of the photo, giving you some neat close-up shots.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa replied above, NOT!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I don't understand, janshares...You mean cropping is not allowed?
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I just took a look at your Hubs and I didn't understand what you meant by "collages". What you seem to be doing is combining several images from different sources to make a single image, and adding text.
  
  That would constitute a 'derivative work' and is exactly what Morguefile is intended for, so provided they have suitable photos, you may have your solution! Just be careful you're using the free-to-use photos (they also have tabs for paid photos on Dreamstime etc), and that you are doing significant work on them - i.e. resizing, cropping, adding text, joining multiple images, etc.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I need to visit healthmunsta to see what constitutes a collage. Later!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Hi jan, you're welcome to comment and follow! I often follow back active hubbers!
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  OMGEEEEE, healthmunsta! I just looked at your hubs. Brilliant technique.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You are so helpful, Marisa! Thank you so much for your patient and polite explanations. This is what I've been doing recently. Morguefile is the way to go for me. I feel quite sorted out right now, this should save me from the endless worrying of whether I'm "stealing" photos or whether I'm attributing correctly.
  reply report
94
jansharesposted 10 years ago
Thanks for bringing this up, healthmunsta. I'm still confused about knowing if I'm doing it correctly in all hubs. Since Christy let us know that photo attribution is the biggest faux pas of most hubbers, I'm not sure mine are right even though I've read and thought I understood the directions.
Marisa and Will, could you please take a random look at a couple of mine and give an example of one that is NOT correct? I don't always include the photographer's name in the top box. Thanks in advance, will check back later.
reply report
1. 60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  janshares,
  Once I have loaded the photo I look for the other info. Since the Source and the Name are optional, if I cannot find the other info, I place the site which I took the photo from into the source box (such as 'morgue file' or 'Wikimedia Commons').
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I try not to use photos that don't come with attribution, including a url with the creative commons and the photographer. Sites like photopin and pixabay will tell you to copy the url underneath the image and paste it to your article. Morguefile doesn't always have a photographer. I thought that as long as you pasted and copied the url, and that the reader could click on "photopin" under source, that was good enough. I guess I misunderstood.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  janshares: I was led to believe that Pixabay says no attribution is required. Now you're telling me they have changed also? OMG!!
  reply report
2. 85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I opened one Hub at random and saw a credit to Photopin. Photopin is not the photographer, it's just an easy way to find Flickr photos - you need to find the original photographer on Flickr and credit him/her.
  
  That's a good rule to remember, actually - if you find yourself crediting a site rather than an individual photographer, double-check that you're doing it right - the whole point of attribution is to give the photographer due recognition.
  
  If all the photos on a Hub are your own, I don't recommend cluttering the photo with a Source credit at all. Just put a credit at the bottom saying all photos are the author's own.
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  How can you credit the photographer if you cannot find the info on him/her? Besides, it says above the box that it is optional to put it in.
  reply report
  70
  Matthew Meyerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If you cannot find the correct attribution for an image, then you should not use it in your Hub content.
  http://hubpages.com/learningcenter/legal-image-use
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If you're referring to Photopin, all the photos are Creative Commons photos from Flickr. That means you MUST credit the photographer. If you click on the photo on Photopin, you'll find yourself on Flickr where you can find the photographer.
  
  Freedigitalphotos.net also says it's mandatory to credit both the site AND the photographer.
  
  Or are you referring to some other site?
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa, please explain the statement on Photopin that says something to the effect of, "You are free to use this image for . . . Attribution is not required."
  This is what confuses me. In addition, at the bottom right, it says, "This photo is safe." When you click on the photo, there is no CC license.
  I downloaded images for my next hub and made note of the photographers to place under source without a URL link. I hope this will be sufficient. Please clarify.
  reply report
  75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I am not Marisa, but I do use this site for photos on other sites. The link to display always shows up when via a pop up when you go to download the photo. You will notice that in the URL itself, it says "creativecommons".
  
  I have not had any problems as long as I use the provided link specified for attribution.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  So I still need to use that url per HP standards, even though the site says otherwise. Thanks, Dale.
  reply report
  75
  Dale Hydeposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  That is my understanding. I can say I have not had any issues with ANY images from there and I have used them on various monitored sites. I figure the URL attribution is also being fair to the one providing me the image to use.
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  janshares,
  I use Creative Commons too almost all of the time, it shows all three URL's which you need.
  If I have to go somewhere else for a photo I hover over the photo and I 'right click' and then I 'left click' on 'Inspect Element'. I search through there for the other info, or as much as I can find.
  Kevin
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Where are you seeing that, Janshares? I've just tried using Photopin and when I click on "get photo", I get a pop-up screen with a link to the original photo and some HTML code for users to paste into their blog (which includes all the necessary attributions).
  
  Of course you can't use the HTML code, but the instructions tell you to click on the photo to go to Flickr - so you can find the photographer link there (click on the "i" icon).
  
  I can't see anywhere where it says "attribution is not required". Is there more than one site called Photopin?
  
  http://www.noupe.com/freebie/photo-pin- … 75002.html
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry for the confusion. It's morguefile. When you click on a photo, you'll see it.
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa,
  I do not use Flickr because they only seem to be 'links' - not actual photos.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  No, they are photos. You'll find a Hub about how to use Flickr photos on the slider on my profile, you might find it helpful.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: Now I am really nervous. I have been using Morguefile for ALL of my hubs and online writing for more than a year. I "alter" them by resizing them and I also do some other editing on some of them, and I always accredit Morguefile.com even though I understood you do not have to do this. I have no understanding as to how you would find the name of the photographer on that site, and am now wondering if ALL of my photos are illegally done. If they are, I might just get a gun and shoot myself! Please advise asap!
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Resizing wouldn't count as alteration.
  
  I've been wondering the same thing, because I've used Morguefile for several years! I don't think I've used any of their images in the last year or so. I've emailed them to ask if and when the change occurred. I'm assuming that any photos used before the rules changed would be OK, whereas photos used since the change wouldn't.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Please let me know what you find out. I've used them a lot on all of my writing sites, which adds up to hundreds of problems for me. Kind of unfair for them to change the rules in the middle of the game! Now you know why I try to limit the number of hubs I write! Will await your answer with bated breath!
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  It looks like they changed ownership, that's probably the reason.
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  This really struck a chord with me. When you use online photos, even when correctly attributed, there are a lot of risks. Aside from the photo source being removed and being left with broken links, you also have the worry of the photo usage rules being changed anytime.
  
  Although I joined almost 2 years ago, I only began writing this year. I could write and publish hubs faster, but this photo use & attribution thing is really stalling me. I'm simply tired of it. I guess it's time to start taking my own pictures. Now the real question is, where can I find Morel mushrooms?
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You could check out my Hub on finding "legal" photos on Flickr. They regularly change the layout of the site so it can be a little confusing, but they haven't changed the rules as long as I've used them, which is several years.
  
  The rule of attribution is pretty simple, really.
  
  - Never use a photo you find on the internet, unless you can find a CC licence or Public Domain statement on the page where it appears, or somewhere on the site.
  
  - always credit the photographer, even if it says you don't have to (that safeguards you if, like Morguefile, they change the rules).
  
  - put a photo credit acknowledgment for the site, if requested, at the end of your Hub.
  
  Morguefile is still good if you have the ability to modify the images yourself (resizing isn't enough!). I get nearly all my images from Flickr, it's amazing how many images they have and on such a breadth of subjects!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, I'll surely check that out!
  report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: I just realized that the photographer's name appears on the left right below the photo. I never noticed this before and am wondering now if that is an "add on" that happened with the change?
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa,
  I know that when you click on the link it shows the photo but all that appears in your Hub is a link. Whenever I tried to copy the URL all that I get is 'copying the link'.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The problem is that you're using the wrong method.
  
  Personally, I find the easiest way is to download the appropriate size of the image to my PC, then upload it to HubPages. That also avoids any risk of a broken link to the photo.
  
  In the source, I always link to the photographer's photo stream, not to the individual photo - because it satisfies the intent of the licence, and avoids the risk of a broken link if the photographer removes that individual photo.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks Marisa. Most of mine are like that. However, the photographer's name is in the url. I see now that you're saying I actually have to put the photographer's name in the source. Some of mine do have the name along with "photopin" or "pixabay" but I will add the names to all now.
  reply report
88
Will Apseposted 10 years ago
I thought you were dead, Paul! Hope you are still making money, by the way.
reply report
70
healthmunstaposted 10 years ago
Just a point of information - taking a picture of a picture (from a magazine, text book etc) constitutes to copyright infringement. So for those of us who are preparing to embark on the insipid journey of taking our own pictures, make sure it's not a picture of a picture!
reply report
1. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  This is the wordage directly from a current summary from Morguefile.com as to how photos are to be used.
  
  Please note that it says you are free to use the photos for distribution (in hubs, etc) without attribution to the author IF you alter the photos to the point where they are NOT EXACTLY THE SAME as the original..
  
  To me this means resizing is not enough, but cropping and other alterations are. I do not believe you have to have a MFP photo to meet these goals, although that is always a good idea.
  
  You are free:
  Remix - to adapt the work.
  Commercial - to use this work for commercial purposes.
  Without Attribution - to use without attributing the original author.
  
  Under the following conditions:
  Stand alone basis - You can not sell, license, sublicense, rent, transfer or distribute this image exactly as it is without alteration.
  
  Ownership - You may not claim ownership of this image in its original state.
  Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the contributor.
  Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  All of you who use Pixabay need to click on this link.
  Basically it states that all public domain photos from Pixabay can be used without any attritubution: However, photos of people, homes etc. may need a signed release IF that photo is used for commercial purposes.
  
  Commercial purposes are defined in the link and usually will not apply to blog articles, etc...but you have to be careful with them. READ IT!
  
  http://pixabay.com/en/blog/posts/public … what-is-4/
  reply report
91
Tinskyposted 10 years ago
There is a very easy way around this. Just make a text box entitled Image credits and include it at the bottom of your article or even to the side of an image or other text etc. Make it a different color to the rest of your article etc. The credit doesn't haven't to be directly under the pictures with the TOS for free digital photos, it just has to appear on the page where the images appear. And with the alteration of images - you still have to provide credit for the original authorship - that's part of the TOS and copyright - I think it has to be something like 80% changed before you can leave off any reference to the original creator, it will depend the TOS for the use (some TOS say no change allowed depending on where you get the images). If you're not paying for the licence to use it, then ask yourself, if you were the original creator - what would you like? Be nice, play nice and respect the artist as you would expect them to respect your work as a writer.
reply report
1. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Where did you get this information? 80% changed? Really? And whose TOS... Hub Pages or Morguefile et al? I'm beginning to think we should simply remove ALL photos to be safe, which is a totally ridiculous thought. If the photo provider in its rules states what you are to do and you do it, then what is the problem? Nowhere have I seen that you must alter the photo 80%. I'd be interested to hear where you found this info so I can see it for myself.
  reply report
  91
  Tinskyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  As I stated in my comment, I'm not sure of the exact percentage, but if you want to do some research on that you should. I would though bring your attention to hubpages own article on "A Guide to Proper Image Use on Hubpages" under the subheading "One Final Note: Fair Use" where it states "Cases that are typically eligible for this exception: ......" and the third dot point "Use a very small amount of copyrighted work (in proportion to the entire work created)". 80% was probably being generous, its more like much higher than this. As for me, I pay for licensed images, give credit or make my own from scratch. Here is the link to the full article: http://hubpages.com/learningcenter/lega … d_21428213
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Tinsky: This is a direct quote from HP that apparently you missed:
  
  Public Domain images, as well as those from many royalty free image sites, do not require attribution, so you are free to use them in your Hubs without citing or linking back to your sources. Note: Some royalty-free image sites do have special stipulations, so be sure to follow the requirements of any licenses they apply to their content.
  
  They specifically mention Pixabay and Morguefile along with other sources of free public domain photos as being OK to use AS PER THE RULES OF THOSE SITES.
  reply report
  91
  Tinskyposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't miss it thanks, there always exceptions which is why I stated it will depend on the TOS in my first comment. - Cheers.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  I think Tinsky was answering the original post, and she's quite right - it's not necessary to put ANY credits in the photo capsule. In the old days, HubPages didn't even have that facility! On my older Hubs, all my photo credits are together at the end of my Hubs.
  
  If you read HubPages' recommended way of attribution, I think they've gone way overboard - they recommend putting everything but the kitchen sink in the capsule! It wasn't possible to put ANY of it in the capsule for several years, and the law hasn't changed - so I'm not sure why they've done that. Maybe it's just to force Hubbers to do the checks they should be doing?
  
  I think it's a good idea to credit the photographer in the capsule - it highlights the fact that the photo isn't fair game - however I don't like clutter, so I always put any other necessary info somewhere else.
  
  As for the 80% rule - if a photographer doesn't allow derivative works, he doesn't allow derivative works. It doesn't matter how much you change it, you're still doing the wrong thing.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Which is exactly why I like using Pixabay and Morguefile! I think you could drive yourself crazy trying to meet everybody's requirements and for the small amount of money one makes here, it really is not worth all of that trouble. I am now checking and reworking Morguefile photos that I have not altered and either dumping them or fixing them. Lots of work...but there does not seem to be much choice. I would like to know when Morguefile changed their rules, though as that could cut my work in half!
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa,
  That is basically what I said a little ways back. HP says in, or above, each URL box that it is optional. I look for the info if possible.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You're misunderstanding me. I'm not saying, include the information "if possible". I'm saying, if the credit is legally required, then it must be on your Hub somewhere. It doesn't have to be within the capsule itself.
  
  That's why HP says it's optional to put it in the capsule. It's not saying anything about what's required legally.
  
  They can't make the URL mandatory because the photo may not have a URL - you may have uploaded it from your own PC. Or it may be a public domain photo that doesn't require attribution.
  
  If you can't find the photographer's name, go and read the site's terms of service first, to make sure you're allowed to use the photo. On every photography site I can think of, you have to credit either the site or the photographer. The only exception (other than public domain photo sites like Pixabay) is Morguefile, where you can use the images without credit IF you change them substantially.
  
  I assume you're aware that every photo on the internet is copyright unless there's a statement or licence somewhere near it, stating it's free to use.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: You can also use Pixabay without accrediting either the site or the photographer. HP lists both Pixabay and Morguefile as being sites that are OK to use as long as you use their guidelines.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for that info. I've never used Pixabay, it looks worthwhile.
  reply report
94
jansharesposted 10 years ago
Well, this was quite a learning experience thread. I did email all of the photographers of the images for my latest hub (all morgueFile). I haven't heard back yet but went ahead and published it. If there's a problem, I will just delete them or crop them if I can't find other suitable images. I have a feeling they won't even answer but at least it's done. This hubbing is not getting any easier but I shall carry on.
reply report
1. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  janshares: If you read my post you will see that as long as you alter the photos you do not have to attribute the photographer or even the site. I use Picmonkey to do this and it's pretty easy. Give it a try and save yourself some headaches.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, TIMETRAVELER2. I've been following this entire thread. Your info has been helpful as well. I've used picmonkey and like it a lot. I promise you I will have less headaches from now on.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  We have been discussing other sites besides Morguefile, so just to be clear - this comment refers to Morguefile photos ONLY!
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Marisa: Thanks for clarifying. I tend to speak to Morguefile and Pixabay because those are the sites I use the most simply because it saves time and effort to do so.
  reply report
73
Shyron E Shenkoposted 10 years ago
Why can't you use a Text capsule under the picture where you can credit all the contributors for the above picture?
reply report
73
Shyron E Shenkoposted 10 years ago
Why can't you use a Text capsule under the picture where you can credit all the contributors for the above picture?
reply report
1. 94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Shyron, I could have as it was suggested twice but I chose to do it the way HP suggests. I will try the text capsule in another hub.
  reply report
94
jansharesposted 10 years ago
Good News Update: I received a very nice reply to my request from one of the photographers who authored several images I used. He was so generous and said I can use any of his images and don't have to ask permission for any others in the future. He only asked for the credit. God is good.
reply report
1. 85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Great news! I've had the same experience a couple of times - one dance photographer even sent me some shots that suited the post even better, and we've gone on to collaborate on other things. He's happy for the exposure and I love his photography!
  
  In some ways, it makes me think it's a good thing we have to ask permission sometimes - it's surprising the connections you can make.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Awww, that's so nice!!!
  reply report
2. 85
  NateB11posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Very cool.
  reply report
85
Marisa Wrightposted 10 years ago
Reply from Morguefile:

The rules have not changed! The rule has always been that the photos are free to use without attribution as the basis for creative works. They are also free for private use.

If you want to use them in their original form in any money-making endeavour, you must contact the photographer for permission (which is likely to be given) and follow his/her requirements.

They do admit the wording "confuses some people". I've replied to say that in my experience, the wording is widely misunderstood and perhaps they should consider amending it!
reply report
1. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  So, what we are doing is a money making endeavor? Or is it creative work? It's still a bit confusing, but I suspect online writing, poorly as it pays, is considered a money making endeavor. Also, did they clarify the business of using the photo in a changed form? What types of changes are acceptable..anything other than resizing?
  reply report
  77
  psycheskinnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  "the basis of creative works" means using it to make a derivative work, e.g a painting.
  
  So if you use it in basically the same form, and you make money, you need permission.
  
  Seems clear to me.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  If you're using it to make money, you're using it to make money.
  
  If you had a blog with no advertising on it, and you weren't selling anything, that would be personal/private use. As soon as you put ads on the blog, or offer an ebook, you're using the image in a money-making endeavour - that's pretty clear to me. We're trying to make money on HP so that would count, too.
  
  As for "creative works" - they're referring to what you do to the picture itself, not the site you post it on. They didn't define it, but clearly, something like resizing isn't creative, nor is simple cropping. Putting several images together in a collage, or adding borders, text, decoration etc would be creative.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  OK...I just wanted to make sure before I continued to make my corrections. As I see it, my choice here is to correct photos on most of my 600 or so posts on various sites, or eliminate them completely. This is the first time I was ever aware of this rule for Morguefile, unfortunately, because I stupidly took the advice of another author say you can use Morguefile pix without attribution and basically when I looked, I did not look close enough at what they said. This is going to be a massive amount of work for me and many others who do no want to put themselves in the position of getting sued. On the other hand, it's been that way on many of my posts for more than two years without problems. Doesn't matter. I'm fixing and dumping. Thanks for making this crystal clear for me.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  You're far from the only one who misunderstood. When Dale said Morguefile photos had to be altered, I went to check Morguefile, convinced I would prove him wrong - then discovered he was right!! Luckily, I use Flickr for almost everything. I have used Morguefile photos but often, it was because I needed an image I could modify, so I've probably met the conditions. I can't even remember where I used them.
  
  As Janshares says, I doubt you'll get sued. At worst, if a photographer spots one of his photos, he'll contact you or HubPages and complain, and you'll have a chance to fix it. Like you, for me it's about doing the right thing, though.
  
  There have been cases of people getting emails from photographers demanding high compensation payments, but they're scams.
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks, Marisa. I got another positive reply from a photographer. All she wanted was the link to the article for reference.
  
  TIMETRAVELER2, I have a lot of work to do, too. But I do think it's unlikely we'll get sued. It really is about doing the right thing and crediting someone's work. I'm not going to sweat it though. Will make changes one image at a time on old hubs and be more conscientious on hubs hereafter.
  I do think it may be easier in some cases to just email the photographer before taking the image down. That seems to be working out for me so far.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Janshares: Of course it's about doing the right thing, but we are talking here about copyright infringement, which is a very serious thing, so it must be taken into consideration. I just finished revamping all 110 of my HP articles, and am now working on my blog. Next will be Bubblews. I want to get this stuff done so I can eliminate worry and move on. Very tiresome. The only good thing is that I am finding other things on my articles to upgrade that will improve them, and all of these edits will temporarily raise Google's view of my work. Good luck to you and all of the others who "want to do the right thing". It's a massive job!
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Well said, TIME. You're a hard worker. 110 revamped already? WOW. Remember to take breaks and take good care of yourself.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  No janshares, those are just the HP ones...I've also revamped 69 on my blog and 40 on Bubblews! I'm old and retired so I have the time to do this...although I'd rather be writing. The one thing I will say is that my articles look better lol!
  reply report
  70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Whatever your situation, it's still inspiring that you work so fast, yet still retain quality!
  
  I'm still slowly working through mine. *sigh*
  reply report
  94
  jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  reply report
77
psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago
Thanks for clearing that up!
reply report
70
wrenchBiscuitposted 10 years ago
NOAA is a great place to get high quality public domain photos with few restrictions: check it out here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/noaaphotolib

There are a plethora of free images available online.A little surfing will reap great rewards!
reply report
1. 70
  healthmunstaposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, this is a great resource. Thanks for posting the link! They have over 6000 photos! Mainly historical images, landscapes, biological etc...Great for hubbers writing on those topics.
  reply report
  70
  wrenchBiscuitposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Glad you like.I just found it last night.As a matter of fact I'm going there right now.
  reply report
2. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Not all Flicker photos are public domain so always check prior to using them. Those that appear on Wikimedia Commons, however, are definitely usable.
  reply report
  60
  The Examiner-1posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Not all on Wikimedia Commons either. You have to read below the photo , some do not say that they are for public, or free, use.
  reply report
  85
  Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Many of the photos on Wikimedia Commons require attribution, too.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  When I us Wikimedia Commons I always do a full attribute and try to make it a point to read the licensing agreement. I've found that the great majority are free to use.
  reply report
82
snakeslaneposted 10 years ago
The National Gallery of Art has a massive collection of images free to use here:
https://images.nga.gov/en/page/show_home_page.html
Quoting from its Open Access Policy here:
With the launch of NGA Images, the National Gallery of Art implements an open access policy for digital images of works of art that the Gallery believes to be in the public domain. Images of these works are now available free of charge for any use, commercial or non-commercial. Users do not need to contact the Gallery for authorization to use these images. They are available for download at the NGA Images website (images.nga.gov).
reply report
1. 78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  NGA also posts that they cannot guarantee that all photos are legal to use, so tread carefully.
  reply report
  82
  snakeslaneposted 10 years agoin reply to this
  The National Gallery of Art Home Page is pretty clear about directing users to the Public Access page for downloads, it is an amazing and valuable resource for images. I would agree treading carefully is what this whole thread is about when it comes to selecting images.
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Well, my friends...I just competed a total overhaul of 400 article photos. I hope I NEVER have to do this again, but I feel secure knowing that things have now been done the right way. I do think it is very easy to make a mistake with photos, but I intend to make them no more!
  reply report
  78
  TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this
  Just after I posted this I received an email from the Morguefile.com team. It seems there's another caveat to using that site...SOME photos of people and buildings require permission! You must check the box beside the download photo where it says yes or no. If it's "yes"...you need to contact the photographer. Nice of them to let us know, huh?
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Image Attribution Nightmare

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Image Attribution Nightmare

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies