Sta.sh
Thank you so much for the support so far, I really appreciate it! =TheSkaBoss really wants me to dress up as superwoman and therefore I need more donations to do it!
By *Eirian-stock
By =redwolf518stock
By ^SparklyDest
Or, perhaps you like to GIVE feedback to others so they can learn from the way others see their work. Or, maybe you just want to spend some time hanging out with some of the coolest artists out there. Or, heck, all three! 
I just came across a journal by ^SanguineVamp saying that sxc.hu's terms of use have been misinterpreted by us (= photomanipulators) all this time!
She wrote an e-mail to sxc.hu to clear this up and the fact of the matter is
sxc.hu is NOT availablefor derivative works, i.e. photomanipulations and collages
unless you ask the individual photographer for permission and get it (getting no answer is NOT an affirmative I'm afraid).
Here are Jade's journals on the matter:
About sxc.hu stockGreetings!
A few of you have been really worried lately about using stock from sxc.hu here because of the change in their ownership. Basically, you were concerned that their license says that you cannot redistribute their stock in whole or in part, by itself or combined with other elements, without the written approval of the original photographer.
As we all know by now, creating a photomanipulation is considered "making a derivative image." And we know we can't make premade backgrounds without permission from the photographers, as doing so is redistributing their work.
I advised a couple of you to check with the Help Desk and sxc.hu to find out the whole truth before making rash decisions about your group that could potentially make everyone panic.
Using my own personal account, I wrote to sxc.hu to find out what the story was. Here's what I said:
I was just wondering whether creating phot
Dead Horse is Dead.Hi all,
Thanks for your patience with the stock nonsense these days. I received this e-mail as part of a mass BCC today:
Dear [name of original writer],
Thank you very much for your email.
I have multiple requests for the same information from many devianart users, this response is bcc'ed to all parties seeking clarification.
I am aware of all the discussions regarding the use of sxc.hu images by devianart users. It appears a lot of the users have misinterpreted the terms of the license agreement granted by sxc.hu and I will be happy to clarify and hopefully answer all of the questions.
1. The rights granted by sxc.hu license are very limited and specific. You may not use sxc.hu images in photo-manipulations or digital collages. Furthermore, you cannot create any derivate works with the use of
Now, what you do with this information is up to you. I for my part will no longer use sxc.hu stock because I don't want to have to wait for permission each time I consider using something. Thankfully, our resouces and stock gallery here on dA is very extensive.
BUT also there I would be careful sometimes - if it feels off, I don't use the stock. That is especially an issue for premades, brushes and cut-out stock as some people seem to think that by altering something they make it their own and somehow have the right to pass something that was stolen on to others.
Please help by spreading the word!
What this means for #photomanipulated:
For #Photomanipulated's gallery submissions, we will have a transition phase, I'd say until the end of this month (March), where we will still accept manips using sxc.hu stock. When the manips folder changes to April, sxc.hu manips will no longer be accepted (unless you have special permission by the photographer - this can be a link to their userpage where they give blank permission or you writing to them and getting personal permission. In both cases, give a link to the profile, in case of the latter, please write that you have permission from the photographer, just as it is customary to do when asking any other photographer for permission to use their image in a manip). I hope you understand we cannot make an exception there, just because it affects virtually everybody. I'm sorry.Take care!
Jasmin
PS: I haven't forgotten about the "ask me anything" journal - I'm currently answering the questions, but some are trickier than I thought, so it'll take a few more days.
Stock images & brushes courtesy of ~ChristasVengel-stock, ~RiNymph-Stock, ~dazzle-textures, ~DadiLights, ~MouritsaDA-Stock, ~frozenstocks, ~PilgrimSoul, *joannastar-stock, ~Atenaispd, bittbox & =kuschelirmel-stock.
Design & coding by =kuschelirmel-stock.Journal Credits
Design & coding by =kuschelirmel-stock.Journal Credits
I think that goes against what many people regard as reasonable. I'd never use the referenced picture unaltered anyway, it would be a minor reference or a starting point. That would make enforcement of this condition practically impossible.
Apparently, sxc.hu, or their lawyers, follow the same idiotic principle.
Not that the conditions of many stockiest on dA are much better, if you think them through. "Ask me for permission if you want to use this outside dA." It sounds reasonable at first, but, hello dear stockist, where will I find you if you've closed your account after some diva-tantrum? Don't get me wrong, you've all the right in the world to impose that condition. But do I want to put hours in some work and then discover that it's effectively become emprisoned in dA? I think not.
As for the unaltered is okay vs. I make no money even if I put it online as print thing: the term "stock" was has always been used to refer to photographs you can use for a fee or for free when you're trying to illustrate a news article or a brochure or whatever since the dawning of photography (and maybe even before that). The idea that someone is taking their photos and "butchering" them into unrecognizable chunks that may or may not look good together if an affront to many photographers. So I can understand why sxc would be cautious in officially allowing manips to be made with their stock when the ToS were written with the traditional stock definition in mind. If no one had asked, I doubt anyone would have minded (no one ever minded as far as I can tell, and many of us left comments on the original images with a link to the manips), but alas, it was asked and officially answered
Das Image License Agreement hat sich nicht geändert und da steht immer noch:
You may use the Image
In digital format on websites, multimedia presentations, broadcast film and video, cell phones.
In printed promotional materials, magazines, newspapers, books, brochures, flyers, CD/DVD covers, etc.
Along with your corporate identity on business cards, letterhead, etc.
To decorate your home, your office or any public place.
Was wäre der Sinn dahinter Manipulationen in dem Zusammenhang zu verbieten? Wofür sonst sind es Stocks?
Wie gehabt steht unter jedem Bild "standard restrictions apply", was mich auf das oben genannte führt.
Wenn niemand gefragt hätte, hätt kein Hahn danach gekräht. Aber jetzt isses halt so.
Naja ich werde das jetzt in Zukunft nicht mehr machen, aber die alten müssen halt bleiben. Bis jetzt hat es nie Ärger gegeben und ich glaub das wird auch nicht mehr kommen.
- simply re-using the picture as it is and
- using bits and pieces of it or using it in a very much altered state, and even just using it as a reference. (Which last thing I think is idiotic, and probably just something in USA law.)
That being said, I'd be surprised if anyone ever got into trouble about making a nice manipulation with some stuff that wasn't theirs, and then hanging it on their sitting room wall or using it as their computer wallpaper. But putting it on your website or selling it, that's another matter.
But in that case the rules have always been like that, not just since March, right? I mean they didn't change any part of the license agreement and no one has ever complained about it to me before. So may it be the case the stock providers don't know any of this either?