Product Creators - Google Images Is NOT A Bottomless Pit Of Free Resources

[Diana Lane]

Last night I bought a product aimed at 'newbies', hoping that after going through it myself, I could recommend purchasing it to the less experienced buyers of some of the web sites I produce, in order to reduce some of the more mundane support queries, while at the same time boosting these buyers' chances of earning.

It was a really good product. Brilliant. The creator built sites in much the same way I do, and maintained and promoted them in the same way that I do too. As I read, I could see that there was little chance that a buyer of the type of site I had in mind could fail if he implemented the plan laid out in the product for it, and he'd be able to see the reasoning behind everything he did too. It was brilliant, until I'd almost got to the end (typically!) and the product creator began to talk about making web banners. 'Just type your keyword into Google Images and choose...' Oh, no! Oh, yes. He then went on to describe how to paste the image into a banner and add text etc. There was simply no way I could recommend the product to anyone after that, which is a shame because it was otherwise a very good one.

What bothers me about it enough to post is that it's not the first time that I've seen a product that advises the same thing. In it's default state, Google Images searches for images, which is why the blindingly obvious name. It does not search for royalty free images, it does not search for copyright free images, it just searches for... images. It's bad enough if you're just lifting them at random (even if only because you were once misinformed by a product creator too and led to believe that it's acceptable), but if you're going on to tell other people to do the same thing with reckless abandon then it's a zillion times worse. The chances are that someone reading your words will one day create a product of their own (possibly lifting one of YOUR images) and... the cycle has to stop. Here is as good a place as any.

Using the 'Advanced search', you can ask Google Images to find images that are labeled for commercial reuse (with or without modification), although most will likely require attribution. For example, a default search for 'hairdryer' will return 2,060,000 results. Using the advanced search set to 'labeled for commercial use' returns just 77, and eliminates 2,059,923 ways of finding yourself in hot water. Clicking on any of the images to see it in it's native habitat will usually show licensing details on the same page. If you're lucky, you'll have encountered an image in the Public Domain, but in most instance you'll be looking at an image that requires an attribution in order to use it.

I value my time, and think a dollar paid to one of the stock image sites for something to be a better use of resources than going through the above procedure and repeatedly checking the terms of each image in the faint hope of finding something suitable, but if you're advising others to go to Google for their images then you should be telling them to use the advanced search and check terms, even if it reveals how little there is there that they can use.

Lifting any image you fancy from Google Images is wrong. Telling other people, from a position of authority, that it's acceptable is REALLY wrong.

[Laura B]

Great post! It feels like a losing fight because there are SO many people who use images without a second thought, plus those who know it's wrong but do it anyway, but we need to keep spreading the facts.

If you would be angry to see your creation on someone else's site without having given permission, then don't do it to others. It's not that hard or expensive to get images the legal way.

[Flyingpig7]

You make a great point, I could'nt agree more I'm surprised the author did not recommend that people should be looking for a copyright free image (however they obtained it). In particular if they did not want to discuss all the other ways you can get your own image to use for headers/ banners.

By the way did you point this out to the author?
(by review or pm) You did'nt mention.

[Don Schenk]

Professional photograpers are always on the lookout for people stealing their images. Two of the professional trade associations in the photo industry each have a staff of attornies who help the photographers seek damages.

Some of the damages have resulted in 6 figure judgements granted by the courts.

If you value your business, pay for rights to use images.

:-Don

[adamv]

A lot of my drawings show up in Google images. Anything larger than a thumbnail has my url plastered across the front of it to prevent people from using it for whatever they like. If they do use one of my drawings, at least they will be advertising my website.

It's a shame when people do things they shouldn't but it's really sad to see people teaching others to do the same. It's just like so many of the article marketing ebooks that tell people to just go find an article on EZA and then put the article in their own words. Rewording an article is not research and does not make it your own.

There's not much we can do about these practices but at least by posting a thread like this you're warning new marketers that it's not right to do this. At that point, it's up to them to decide what's right and wrong and how they choose to run their business.

[Diana Lane]

Originally Posted by Flyingpig7

By the way did you point this out to the author?
(by review or pm) You did'nt mention.

That's only fair to the author, as well as other buyers, isn't it? You're right, it would be wet not to. It's done.

[Frank Bruno]

I guess its the easy way out for many marketers.. that is to mock others in their sales pages, content,e-books,etc.

"Oh if so and so put this in his/her e-book then it must be ok for me to do the same"


Theres so many more REAL free sites out there that can be used for creating banner, graphics, photos etc. to not have to pull legit content and manipulate it.

There are some very creative marketers here, enough creativity skills to create their own products so I don't see whay they can't continue with their creative skills to develop something totally unique to their business.

Frank Bruno

[Brad Spencer]

One thing I learned in college is to look at .edu sites since usually they are royalty free.

I know there are some plugins that use photodropper or something like that nad you can search flikr for only non-copyright images.

In all honesty though, just buy an image for a buck or two at istockphoto.com...I agree with Don that it's not worth a lawsuit for saving a few dollars...and you can find anything there.

Cheers,

Brad

[VegasGreg]

That, along with all the reports telling people to just copy articles from directories and just change a few words has lead to a massive snowball effect of illegal copy-cats on the net.

[DogScout]

Does this mean I cannot PDF all the threads in the Warrior forum and sell them as a new product?

Poop!

[DogScout]

Originally Posted by Brad Spencer

One thing I learned in college is to look at .edu sites since usually they are royalty free

Brad

Careful, Edu sites are usually allowed to use copyright images if it is for educational purposes. Finding them on those sites does not convey the same exceptions.

Same with Gov sites, they use copyrighted images all the time, usually with permission, but again, those permissions do not follow your 'snagging' of it.

[Kurt]

IMO, every web developer should have a collection of royalty free clipart, as well as access to stock images. It's just part of the cost of doing business.

Also, check www.morguefile.com as they have the most liberal usage license on the Net...No attribution needed.

[Kevin Riley]

With all the free public domain images available (Wikimedia has a ton of them) and the images you can buy at Dreamstime, iStockPhoto, and a few others for about a buck a photo, there is no need to be playing Russian Roulette with copyrighted images.

[Jody_W]

I'm so glad you mentioned Dreamstime. I got some great images there for a site I was doing last year. I posted on their message board when I couldn't find a specific image and I had people running out shooting new pics to fill my needs. I bought a bunch of them and wouldn't hesitate to go back there again.

[pink sapphire]

I have a hobby site where I post my photos and artwork - one of my images (along with a bunch of others stolen from similar sites) turned up in someone's crappy iPhone app! It amazes me that so many people seem to think it's ok to take and use anything they want, just because it's on the web