"I got inspired last evening and created this new art."

In this post I want to address these following topics:

What can be assumed and what can not?

What is copyright?

Plagiarism, lying, stealing...

Exceptions: when you don't have to mention the artist, when the art is new enough and how much did the artist work when creating the art?

Educate yourself

The second last topic is a really wide subject and contrary to the first two, can't always be accurately determined, but I think as it is often drawn in to the conversations about copyright, plagiarism and someone getting inspired of someone elses work, I think I should scratch the surface a bit and also tell you my own opinion. Opinion which is debatable. Facts aren't.

Back to my first statement at the top of this post.
"I got inspired this evening and created this new art."

Now let's pretend that this artwork that I've done here is not manipulated from my own original photo, but some photo that I just found from the internet.

What can be assumed and what can not?

If that short statement is all the info I am giving you in this post, then what I am saying is:

• I got inspired.
• It's new art.
• I did it.

And what I'm not saying is:

• How much of the art creation process is my doing?
• If I didn't do it from scratch, who is the original artist? And model?

So with the information that I've given, the only obvious conclusion is that I made this from scratch, invented this person from my head or worked with a model who doesn't demand her name to be published, photographed or painted and then perhaps added something in post edit. What you can or cannot determine on your own reading between the lines, does not matter. You can perhaps see it easily that this is not a painting. It's a photo with a filter. But it does not matter how much you think you know about this particular art. The only thing that matters is that I, the publisher of this artwork, have not given you any extra info. And that is not a matter of opinion. It's a fact. I have not given you info that the photo is not mine or who is the original artist. _{(We are still pretending that this is not my photo.)}

If it's my own art, then I don't have to state that it's mine because that's a given. If I've been altering my original art, I don't have to say that I've done that, although it would be cool to say something about the process. If I'm not the photographer, then I should tell who the original artist is. Always. Well, almost always but we will deal with that later. So always it is. For now.

And people who say otherwise, like: "Duh, it's pretty obvious that this is a photo with a filter, I still love it, it's art!" my answer is: Obvious or not, the person publishing the art did not say anything about that. And that's not debatable. It's a fact. You can love it and say that it's art. That is not the issue here.

So if this was someone elses photo, what I should have said is something like this:
"Created a new artwork from THIS artists photo."
^{THIS would have a link to the original photo."}
That's the minimum info.

In other words, do not fail to mention who is the artist your work is based on. Not like this one did. And always, if someone asks you to edit the post because you failed to mention the original artist, please edit your post and mention the original artist.

But as that photo above is mine, and I want to make things clear, I will say:
"I did a new version of one of my photos that I've taken some years ago. Edited with an app called Photo Lab. The model is Sailorsucy." And perhaps I would also add, because it is not always clear to everyone: "I own all the rights to this photo. Meaning: you can not use it without my permission. I usually publish my art under some CC license, but not photos that have people in them because most of those people have not given me the right to add the CC license to the photo that they are in."

What did we learn?

Always mention the original artist!

Model: Airi, Photographer: Insaneworks, edited with some of those free apps available out there that do not require mentioning if you use it, Copyright: Insaneworks.

What is copyright?

There are numerous places where you can find info about copyright and different licenses.
Just to mention few:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/copyrightaware/copyright-permissions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/?lang=en

If you publish art and you do not mention the artist, it is automatically assumed that you are the artist.
And at the same time:
If you publish your art it is automatically assumed that you own all the rights.
So when you see art out there, you have to assume that:
If it is not otherwise stated, all rights are reserved. That means that you can not take it and publish it as your art.

This is something that people have decided together and although it can change in the future, it is not debatable. There are rules. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a fact.

Usually it is pretty easy to find out who owns the rights to some picture out there. Who owns the pages you found the art from? Is there a caption? There are also various reasons why there would not be a mention of the copyright owner / artist. Commission work for instance. But that does not mean that someone wouldn't own the rights if you can not find any mention of the original artist or copyright owner.

What is debatable is do you support the copyright law? If you think all art published out there should be free to use in any way you want, you are allowed to your opinion. But that's only an opinion. The fact is that artists out there have rights. And there are good reasons why immaterial rights exist. One of them is that artists would be payed what they deserve for their years of training and hard work. Just like any other professional out there. Think of it this way: you do what you do, sweat for it and then someone comes, takes it from you for free and says that you have no rights to claim that it's yours or earn with your work. If you think that's cool, take it, you still have to respect the opinions of other people out there. If that professional does not want to give you their work for free, that's what you have to accept.

I happen to think that too much restrictions sometimes kills creativity. And I also happen to think that almost everything imaginable is already invented and someone else already has had the same idea as I or you have. But I also want to respect the rights of other artists out there. Their right to decide what other people can do with their work.

What did we learn?

If you didn't do it or you do not own the rights, it's not yours, so don't claim it's yours and always mention the original artist!

"I was inspired and draw this for you!" Bullshit! This is a photo taken by me of beautiful Paola. I used a filter I found from one of those free apps. Just couple of clicks and that's it. No pencil, ink or pen involved.

Plagiarism, lying, stealing...

Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism

"Oh but although you recognize the original work, I made enough modifications so that it is new art."

A lie is an assertion that is believed to be false, typically used with the purpose of deceiving someone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

"Yesterday inspiration came to me and here's my new drawing!

In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft

"It was out there and I just took it because I could. Now I'm claiming that it's mine."

If you fail to mention the original artist or where your inspiration came, if you say something is yours although it isn't, you might end up listed here: https://steempeak.com/@jaguar.force

I think it's pretty bad if a code that recognizes faces, finds your new artwork from some other site that sells jewelry. So your new art is a Photoshop or some Photo Lab like app edit of a jewelry model found from the internet. If you are not the photographer, you probably took the photo without the permission of the web site owner or the photographer. Who ever owns the rights to that photo. And you also failed to mention the original artist or provide a link to the original photo.

What did we learn?

If you do not own the rights, it's not yours, so don't publish it and claim it's yours or fail to mention the original artist!

Model: Anna, Photographer: Insaneworks, edited with some of those photo edit apps, Copyright: Insaneworks.

Exceptions

When you don't have to mention the artist?

Public domain, CC0

The public domain consists of all the creative work to which no exclusive intellectual property rights apply. Those rights may have expired, been forfeited, expressly waived, or may be inapplicable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

If you bought the art with the right to modify and publish it where ever you want.

More exceptions that are about where or how you are going to use the art:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/copyrightaware/the-exceptions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitations_and_exceptions_to_copyright
https://copyrightexceptions.eu
Parody, freedom of speech, teaching or scientific research. Just to mention few obvious ones.

There is plenty of public domain photos, pictures and drawings. Use those when you need inspiration. And if you are one of those skillful artists who can mimic perfectly the brush strokes of famous painters or draw a picture from memory almost line for line, show your skills to us! But never let us believe that the original idea was also yours. Always mention the original artist! Also it would be awesome to see some process images because there's also the possibility that some people out there use an app to edit the existing photo or just a photocopier.

Then there's the: "I do not know who this belongs to" reason. Something has been changed so many times already out there in the internet, that it's almost impossible to trace the original artwork. But still you can say that the original work isn't yours and that you don't know who the artist is. And if someone comes to you and says: Here's the original work and the artist, you should always give credit to the artist.

Again there are laws and rules. And also guidelines that you should obey if you want to be a law-abiding citizen. Not so much debatable facts. Only debatable if your opinion is that you don't like these rules and regulations.

What did we learn?

You really should mention who is the artist your work is based on.

Model: Susanna, Photographer: Insaneworks, edited with an app, Copyright: Insaneworks.

When the art is new enough?

Inspiration and copying:
https://www.copyrightuser.org/faqs/question-10/
New, original art:
https://www.copyrightuser.org/understand/rights-permissions/using-reusing/

So is it original enough?
This is something we can debate on. And it has been debated. Everywhere for years. Is it a copy, a ripoff, inspired by, or truly an original idea, new art. Here's few examples of my favourite subject, music industry: 5, 4, 3, 2 and at number one, someone who has not been accused of stealing anything, although you can hear and see that there are other artist involved. And what this, one of my favourite artists, Wax Audio did, was mention the original artists when creating something new. Lady Judas (Lady Gaga + Judas Priest Mashup) by Wax Audio

Other examples:
Are these original enough?
1, 2 & 3. There's art where I've mentioned the original artist and then there's some that I haven't. Some I've spent more time with and some that I haven't. And there's CC licenses and public domain pictures. Also, in my opinion, I've created new, enough original art so that I thought that I didn't have to mention the photographers that photographed the models. Or mention the probable copyright owners, the businesses whose paper adds I've used in the collage art. But what do you think? Is it original enough? New?

My opinion is that too strict copyright laws in some way do kill creativity. But I also want to respect those artists who do not want their art to be copied and modified.

How much did you shed blood sweat and tears for it? _{Also what is art?}

I wish I would have commented this post but I didn't have time to do that at the time when I read the post, and later I forgot all about it. But better late than never, don't you think @eveuncovered? :)

My opinion is that almost anything and everything is art. It may be an Instagram / app filter, supermarket art, too weird to understand, easily done. But it's art. And I would like to extend the concept of art to include coders, scientists and engineers too. I think combining dancing to engineering, science with painting, code and illustrations and then some photography and singing is really fun way to create art. :) But that's just me.

I can though see what bugs most artists who have trained themselves for years and years to be better at what they do, when we think about an app that draws or paints the picture for you. With just few clicks. And with the people who come and praise the person who did the clicking with the app. It also bugs me too! I mean credit to those who deserve it. It's the art app creators that are the true artists in this case. And the ones that can do the same thing with a brush or a camera.

But then again the apps sure are fun to play with. I used Photo Lab and Picas to the photos on this post. And tens of other apps that mostly gave one cool image and the rest was just crap. So art is what you like to see or what raises questions. I personally happen to like this picture (edited with an app) of Anna:

Original

Educate yourself

I'm not saying that using filters is bad, not at all. It's just one way to create art and personally I love to mix and match. Use different styles and techniques. And I do admire art that is playful in every way. Also when created.

What I am saying is that people should educate themselves on spotting those who have original ideas and who have their own, unique style when they create their art. Not get fooled by those who just copy and do not mention the source or the artist who inspired them to create something. And I'm also saying that you should always appreciate those artists who have worked hard for their art. Who are great at creating exceptional art easily because they have trained and educated themselves. People who are honest. And...

Give credit to the original artist!

Rest of the pics that I made with just few clicks, almost effortlessly:

Airi, Anna, Paola and Susanna. Beautiful and talented models.

Photos: Insaneworks