Creative Commons tag

Hi, all.

As of today, there's only 1 post in Danbooru with the tag creative commons, but there are actually a few images here that are licensed under CC terms. Most of artist #126719's work is licensed under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0, according to her official Facebook page.

I had tagged her illustrations with the creative commons tag, but they got removed. I've reached out to the user who removed them via direct message, and he told me the reason is that the creative commons tag should work like franchise tags (e.g. kantai collection). In other words, only works created by or for the Creative Commons as an organization should be tagged as such.

It seems to me that this topic could benefit from some debate, as I post Mony's illustrations from time to time, and most of them are released as CC. I don't know how many other images in Danbooru are Creative Commons, but I'm pretty sure there are very few, so I understand that the community may not have given it too much thought until now, but I would think that with the amount of images I've been posting that *are* CC, maybe this would be a good time to discuss this, make things clear, and maybe write up a wiki page for the tag (I don't mind writing it once I understand what the community thoughts are on the matter).

What exactly should be tagged creative commons? Anything that's released under those licenses? Only art created specifically for Creative Commons as an organization? Only art with a Creative Commons watermark like post #1317198? Or maybe the tag shouldn't exist at all?

Thanks.

It is tagged creative_commons because the CC logo is literally on the image.

Aristocrat said:

It is tagged creative_commons because the CC logo is literally on the image.

I know. That's why it wasn't removed from that image. However there was another image that didn't have the CC watermark and was still tagged that, but that was removed too.

Having the CC logo on the image is one interpretation of the tag. The question is, precisely, when should an image be tagged creative commons? Is it only when the CC watermark is on the image?

In that case, creative commons should be a standard tag, not a copyright tag.

That is tied to whether danbooru wants to start attaching the copyright information of an image onto posts, as we do artist, rating, etc. Sounds good for creative commons, but could get messy when it moves onto stuff like artists putting on the image that they don't want the image on sites like danbooru, which we have in the past ignored until the artist explicitly emails webmaster@danbooru.donmai.us.

Also a lot of fanart might be tricky to suss out without a lawyer with access to the original series' copyright holder's policy. So I would predict a lot of images wouldn't be able to be tagged with such info, or would be too much effort for taggers to bother with, leaving these tags with only a handful of creative commons posts.

Also, without a tag on the image, it could be tricky to know for sure they we've gotten the legal status correct. For example, someone might steal another's art, use it as their own, say they've put it under CC, it then gets put on danbooru and tagged CC, original artist finds it on danbooru, with it labelled CC, when the original artist has not put it under CC, and is now quite upset with danbooru. More-so then they would've been for a mere miss-attributed artist tag.

All that said, I think a marker on the image should be tagged. So when there is a (c), a TM, a CC, or an (R), etc, visible on the image. Else if it's not on the image, leave the information off danbooru, and people will have to follow the source links to find that out. Else things could get messy.

Edit: That said, we could start making notes on artist wiki pages, noting when an artist says they put all or even some of their work under free licenses. Would need some special emphasis on the some.

Serlo said:

That is tied to whether danbooru wants to start attaching the copyright information of an image onto posts, as we do artist, rating, etc. Sounds good for creative commons, but could get messy when it moves onto stuff like artists putting on the image that they don't want the image on sites like danbooru, which we have in the past ignored until the artist explicitly emails webmaster@danbooru.donmai.us.

Also a lot of fanart might be tricky to suss out without a lawyer with access to the original series' copyright holder's policy. So I would predict a lot of images wouldn't be able to be tagged with such info, or would be too much effort for taggers to bother with, leaving these tags with only a handful of creative commons posts.

Also, without a tag on the image, it could be tricky to know for sure they we've gotten the legal status correct. For example, someone might steal another's art, use it as their own, say they've put it under CC, it then gets put on danbooru and tagged CC, original artist finds it on danbooru, with it labelled CC, when the original artist has not put it under CC, and is now quite upset with danbooru. More-so then they would've been for a mere miss-attributed artist tag.

All that said, I think a marker on the image should be tagged. So when there is a (c), a TM, a CC, or an (R), etc, visible on the image. Else if it's not on the image, leave the information off danbooru, and people will have to follow the source links to find that out. Else things could get messy.

Edit: That said, we could start making notes on artist wiki pages, noting when an artist says they put all or even some of their work under free licenses. Would need some special emphasis on the some.

I personally agree with everything you've said. I'll refrain from using that tag from now on, unless someone has good arguments in favor of it.

That said, someone could just as easily add a CC watermark to an image and wreak havoc too. Maybe the tag really shouldn't exist.

Note: I'm being very compromising here, because I actually love Creative Commons and it's an important issue in my opinion. I just wanted to note that even though I'm saying maybe the tag shouldn't exist, I'd love if I actually could tag those illustrations with it without causing trouble for the community. Our of curiosity, does anyone else here care about it too?

Danbooru at its core is an image aggregator site that makes it easy for users to search for images based on descriptive tags that list off what is shown in the image itself and users who actually care about the licensing can follow the source link to find out. Additionally, the site has over 2 million uploads, the vast majority of which have completely inaccessible copyright or licensing information either due to age, 404ing, or lack of proper documentation by the original artist. It also requires significantly more effort to find that info compared to just tagging what is visible in the image - the limited time that danbooru contributors have should be used for more immediately useful things than adding licensing information that is virtually worthless to the vast majority of users, who care about what is in the image rather than the license under which it is released.