Dumb question about attribution and links

[Saito S]

I figure someone here probably knows more about the particulars of CC licenses than I do.

So, I'm making a blog post where I'm planning to link to several images, all of them found on Wikimedia Commons and all of them having Creative Commons licenses that allow copying/redistribution with attribution. And I started wondering something regarding the CC license when it comes to this.

Obviously if I were to copy/download the image and actually host it ON my blog, I'd need to provide credit in the blog post ("photo by such-and-such" with a link to their Flickr or Wikimedia userpage or whatever they have is what I'd do in that case). But I'm not doing that - I'm just linking to it. And I'm not even going to link to the images directly, but to the image page on Wikipedia. Like this.

The post I'm writing is going to have links to over a dozen different images. I figured, since I'm just linking to the information page on Wikipedia (which has the author/owner and license info right on it), no problem right? But I'd rather be sure. I did some searching online and was unable to find ANYTHING about what (if anything) you have to do when linking in this way - all of the FAQs and guidelines and whatnot that I've found focus on redistributing the image file. So, do I actually need to provide proper credit for each photo in the blog post for this, or am I ok not doing so since I'm just linking to the wiki pages?

Kind of feel silly asking, but I figured, I don't actually know the answer for sure, and I'd rather err on the side of caution.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It sounds like you are hotlinking directly to the images on Wikipedia, as you aren't hosting them on your blog. This is generally considered a no-no--bad Internet etiquette. You should download them and host them on your own web space. I assume you mean you are showing the actual images on your blog post, not merely providing a text link to the image page. If you are just providing a text link to the image page, you don't need to do anything else.

If you are using the images themselves, at the end of your blog post, just have a statement like this:

"Images in this post are licensed CC-SA-NC. Click an image to view further details."

Modify the above to use whatever the real license terms are.

 

[Saito S]

It sounds like you are hotlinking directly to the images on Wikipedia,

Ah, not quite - I didn't really make this clear before (oops), but the links in my blog post won't be hotlinked images. They'll look like the example link in the OP of this thread.

If you are just providing a text link to the image page, you don't need to do anything else.

Yep, that's actually precisely what I'm doing. One thing I do know is that hotlinking is generally not a great idea in most circumstances, and if I wanted the images to show up IN my blog post, it'd be best to host the files on my blog (for this particular post, I decided that I didn't want the images breaking up the text in the post itself, and would rather just provide links). The part I wasn't sure about was if simply linking to the "File:" pages on Wikipedia via text links was considered "using" the images in the same way that hosting them and showing them in the post would be. I assumed not, and as I said, felt a little silly for asking, but I'm still kind of new to publishing content this way and I figured it'd be better to be certain. Sounds like it's fine, though.

If you are using the images themselves, at the end of your blog post, just have a statement like this:

"Images in this post are licensed CC-SA-NC. Click an image to view further details."

Modify the above to use whatever the real license terms are.

For future reference, if I were to host the images and display them in the post, wouldn't "BY" (attribution) licenses require me to list the owner/creator of each individual photo somewhere in my post? That was my interpretation from what I've read at CC and Wikipedia, anyway.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Wikimedia has no problem with you hotlinking their images, even if they advice you not to (for your own good).

 

[publiusr]

I thought that fair use covered you as long as you gave credit to the source, as I did with the popsci dreamchaser art "some amateur CAD doodling with wild speculation by Jim Benson (RIP)."
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=24156

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It sounds like you are hotlinking directly to the images on Wikipedia,

Ah, not quite - I didn't really make this clear before (oops), but the links in my blog post won't be hotlinked images. They'll look like the example link in the OP of this thread.

If you are just providing a text link to the image page, you don't need to do anything else.

Yep, that's actually precisely what I'm doing. One thing I do know is that hotlinking is generally not a great idea in most circumstances, and if I wanted the images to show up IN my blog post, it'd be best to host the files on my blog (for this particular post, I decided that I didn't want the images breaking up the text in the post itself, and would rather just provide links). The part I wasn't sure about was if simply linking to the "File:" pages on Wikipedia via text links was considered "using" the images in the same way that hosting them and showing them in the post would be. I assumed not, and as I said, felt a little silly for asking, but I'm still kind of new to publishing content this way and I figured it'd be better to be certain. Sounds like it's fine, though.

Not to worry! Sounds like you've got it under control. Better to ask about these things.

If you are using the images themselves, at the end of your blog post, just have a statement like this:

"Images in this post are licensed CC-SA-NC. Click an image to view further details."

Modify the above to use whatever the real license terms are.

For future reference, if I were to host the images and display them in the post, wouldn't "BY" (attribution) licenses require me to list the owner/creator of each individual photo somewhere in my post? That was my interpretation from what I've read at CC and Wikipedia, anyway.

You're right, you would need to give attribution in your post (even a footnote at the end) if attribution is required by the CC license.

I thought that fair use covered you as long as you gave credit to the source, as I did with the popsci dreamchaser art "some amateur CAD doodling with wild speculation by Jim Benson (RIP)."
http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=24156

Not necessarily. Fair Use is not especially well-defined though you can read up on how it is usually applied. Basically, you have to be able to justify your Fair Use for some legal purpose. You can't just use something and say "fair use, it's legal!"

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Next you'd be telling us that "I do not own this work! No copy infringement intended!" that's now quite popular on YouTube doesn't justify one either?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Remember, pirated software is for "educational purposes only!"

 

[Saito S]

Remember, pirated software is for "educational purposes only!"

Thanks for the additional info (and for not ever actively agreeing with me that my question was dumb ). It's weird, it really does seem like such a small thing now that I have it cleared up, but as I said, I'm new to using content this way. A brief search online for general info on the subject led not only to CC and Wikipedia pages, but to horror stories about people being sued for posting in their personal blog about a photo they thought was nice that they found on Flickr. So I decided that caution really was in order, heh.