The last thing you want is a cease and desist order, isn't it. Stobe mentioned this in a BuzzCast episode a while back, mentioning that a friend of his had received a cease and desist order. David Book told me during BuzzDay that some unfortunate users here have experienced the deadly letter. I can't make this more clear, that you could be charged thousand of dollars. In fact, the average cease and desist order cost is around $2000 (£1600). Do you want a letter like this to come through the post? I can't emphasise the importance to have Royalty Free Stock photos, instead of taking off Google images. Unfortunately, some stock photo websites are expensive, at around $60 (£40) for just one photo. There are alternatives to look at. This is what I do: Method 1) I look on Google images for the type of image I want. If I can't resist the urge to use this photo, I ask the photographer, but only if they are amateur. Often, they like their photos being spread, so there is no or very little charge. The likelihood is that they will be kind, and allow you to use the photo. and this is great. You then have prior permission to use the photo. Problem solved. Method 2) I just use some of the expensive Stock photo websites if there aren't any alternatives Method 3) Find cheaper Stock photo website. Some are even free. Here's my favourite free website: http://www.everystockphoto.com But even if they do cost a pound or so, who cares? It's only a pound. So this is my word of advise to all you guys out there. Just use the stock images, or your own. Don't get yourself tangled up. My school friend once got one, but he was lucky he was young enough to use the excuse, "It was for educational purposes". He was lucky though.

I cant agree anymore. In the NY meet up we were speaking about images. Something like shutterstock is expensive but worth it. Amazing quality royalty free. What are some other good royalty free sites?

There's tons of great sites, and many of them are cheap or free, but even the expensive ones are often worth it.

Yeah I agree. There are also some sites where you can subscribe for the month and get as many stock photos that you may need I'll post the urls when I get to the computer

You are the best mysps! Cant wait to see the links!

Here is the one I was referring to: http://www.crestock.com/buy-credits-subscriptions.aspx You can download 600 images (20 per day) any resolution/size for 199$. They have other subscription models as well. It comes to about 0.33 cents per image. Not bad if you have a wallpaper, photo app or game.

You can use Google Advanced Image search to find your image and make sure you select the appropriate Usage Rights (near the bottom of the form)

So, I'll share a personal story, as I'm one of those people that David was probably referring to. I have an app - AZ Fishing Spots - that is currently off the market for that very reason. As I was putting together the app, I was very conscientious about making sure that all the information I had in the app, including images, was in the public domain. I didn't want anything to come back and bite me later. Well, it did, and it bit me hard! Many of the images I used in my app were from US government websites, and those images are supposed to be in the public domain because they were created by government employees during their employment. So, when I grabbed images of fishes, which I used through the app, I felt super confident that those images were in the public domain because it said they were. Well, it turns out the AZ Fish and Game Department apparently has some images on their site that they don't have a license to use! So, even though I got them from a supposed reputable source...well, it just didn't work out. My advice...triple check the licenses for each of your images. And then be prepared for the possibility that even your best due diligence might not be enough. In the end it's cost me the app being on the market, plus some pretty stiff penalties (which I negotiated down to about a third of the original amount). The web is a murky place for sure! Mark

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones… Since most of my content is locally based, I have my Nikon Point and Shoot camera with me most of the time, and just snap a few and pick the best one… But I'd like to propose that we all start taking photos of all kinds of things, and 'pool' them together for a BT collection of member donated images that folks can use. (Similar to Ian's gracious permission to use his audio) All this sort of thing takes time, so if you need island/beach images, let me know. Cheers! -- Smug

I like this idea of pooling images.

Yeah I thought that government public domain images were fine to use. Good to know that I have to check the licenses there too :/ Also, like Aussie Ryan mentioned you can do the same with Flickr and advance search and select the options to adapt and use for commercial use. I had the luck of getting permission from a photographer to use his photos by sending a polite email and of course giving him credit in the app that the photos were used. It was a win/win for everyone. I'm sure there are more people willing for a little exposure in an app to give you permission. You'd be surprised!

Image rights should be taken seriously. Last year when I was producing books for Kindle, I needed high quality images for the front page and I resorted to buying images from a professional photo site. It wasn't expensive that much, about a dollar or two per image, and I ended spending some 40-45 bucks just for that. You will want to check the rules for the sites that you buy images from, however, now that I am entitled to those images I put them into the apps -- from icons in the Play store to the images in the app files. In case of this photo site, there is a limitation that I should pay more if the image gets viewed more that 500,000 times, but for now, unfortunately, I am secure, as my apps have just started their lives in the store.

Very very interesting thread, thanks guys. It is oh so tempting to grab these images from google! They are just there, ready for the taking ... my mouse is calling me (come on, just right click, nobody will know)... must resist ... Isn't there a rule or something saying that if you modify an image ever so slightly then you can call it yours? Not that I used this method or find it morally right, just wondering for the sake of my own photos out there. Farcat

Here's my take. First if downloading images and no source is evident. You would want to make sure that you check the image for any metadata (right click properties) or if it looks like a professional photo, check the exif data in lightroom or any photo editing program, with slrs you can embed that info, even if it's cropped etc. Second are some useful resources on how getty and others are tracking infringements 1. http://services.tineye.com/ 2. http://www.kevinandamanda.com/whatsnew/tutorials/how-to-see-if-your-photos-are-being-used-on-another-site.html 3. http://ameenafalchetto.com/find-out-if-your-images-are-being-used-online/ Third what to do if you get the letter. 1. http://www.extortionletterinfo.com/ 2. http://lorelle.wordpress.com/2006/04/10/what-do-you-do-when-someone-steals-your-content/ When I build a website for a client and I am in need of photos, I always keep a purchase log of the photos and any licensing agreements attached to its use. Since I do photography, if it's an image they like but too expensive to license, worst case scenario and best option is to replicate the photo and take it myself, so there's no question on usage. Hope this helps Ed

I agree that the best thing to do is definitely taking the photo yourself. This way, it is guaranteed that you have all the rights you want. Like Ed, I do photography, and with my tourist apps I'm making, it's easy to go out for a day and take lots of photos. However, many times I have come back with hundreds of unsatisfactory images. But this isn't the case with other apps. Let's take an example from one of my friend's apps. He has created an app showing the value of precious metals, such as silver and gold. He needed images of blocks of gold, silver and platinum. In this case (unless he has millions to spare), the only option is to get some stock images.

I cannot emphasise the importance enough. David had told me about @GoNorthWest's story (I won't share it) and it is tragic how just small things can cause the biggest costs. I agree that the temptation is so high with Google images. And thoughts might just be 'who's going to notice'. Well if you are noticed, it is a serious cost. When you add up the costs, it could cost as much as a new MacBook Pro (if not, more). What would you rather have?

Interesting thread. I like DepositPhotos- anyone else ever used them? Also, there's no issue with using our own photos that we've used elsewhere, like on Facebook, right? The idea that Facebook "owns" the photo after you've uploaded it to your page is goofy? I probably sound naive but had to ask… Never looked into it. And wondering about the answer to Farcat's question about modifying an image and calling it yours?

Even if you modify an image, it's not 'new', or yours. Otherwise I would be publishing Tom Clan… I mean Smug Wimp novels… ;) But with respect to facebook, your images are 'your' images, and you give them a cost free license to use it up until you delete your account. https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms Cheers! -- Smug

It's a huge quagmire for sure. My particular story illustrates that even when you believe fully that you're doing the right thing, there may be earlier decisions that had been made, not by you, that end up causing you pain. I fully believed that the images I was using were in the public domain...but my source was tainted. Taking images would be great, and as a photographer I'm all for that, but since these are of fish, it's kinda difficult! Lesson learned for me, and my next version of the app will have a complete listing of the sources of all my images and the understood license for them as a screen in the app itself. Mark

Let me offer this to everyone. A workaround but always try to seek out and ask permissions. I've done this with my celeb clients, they say Ed I really like this photo taken of me from this public event. I wish I was able to have that photo from the event that a fan uploaded or something where the photographer has no credits listed. or can't be reached. Online it's a hires photo now that cell phones MP rates are high, obviously I wasn't there to take the photo. So this is what I did. Open the image on one of my HD monitor or connect my flatscreen TV bigger the better, go full screen mode. Take my Canon 50D SLR no flash, make sure my exif data has all my photography credits minus the location, set it to RAW file so you can further tweak it in Lightroom or photoshop, change it to outdoor lighting clouds etc. Make sure you do it where there are no external light source so there's no screen reflection or glares. You know where this is going, I take the photo, it captures and embeds my copyright info into the image file. I then go into photoshop do touchups etc. save the file and now I'm the owner of the image. and should anyone ask my ownership data can be extracted from the file altered or not. The final output is for web at 72dpi, but i set it to the highest setting on my camera then work down from there. You don't need to have an SLR you can do the same with any camera that you can add your info to. Cheers Ed

Surely this is cheating though. Maybe it might be legal, but it sound like it wouldn't be. But anyway, even of it is, you've essentially copied someones photo. @Smug... I always thought that Facebook photos were of your ownership, but Facebook may be allowed to use this for advertising or such. I didn't know that FACEBOOK are the owners and random people could take it. Thanks for the info... I'll be slightly more cautious.

@Thomas, I agree, but when multiple photos can be taken at the same event different angles etc. the subject is still the same. If there is no claim that can be found that can be traceable, then does that mean an image can't be used as a source of reference. If the final output is new work product, in the end the client is the owner of their brand. I don't recommend this as a norm or to cheat the system, and always find the true owner.

It is an interesting ethical question. There is more to the issue of whether or not you can be caught. The copyright info in the picture is not the source of truth on ownership--it is a reflection of the owner who took the image. If it is modified, then it no longer reflects who owns the picture. I would recommend contacting the owner of the picture and asking permission, because that seems like the high road in this case. Better yet, take your own pictures, or find photographers to partner with on your projects. The boundaries are hard to see sometimes, and ethical questions like this are far from black and white.

And what if you took a photo from a YouTube video? We are more or less permitted to use YouTube videos in our apps (Google owns both YouTube and Android), but what about images generated from the videos? Would they be allowed or not?

Remember that you won't have control over what goes into the video. So you might link a YouTube video in your app, to find out it is taken down two weeks later. Then your app has got a fault that wasn't caused by you. Also, the owner could change the content and then it might not be relevant.

I like to draw stick men fighting, then photograph them, and think how could I make this into an app. Then I drink another bottle of lager, dream that I was a ninja, see my reflection in the mirror and see that I am truly a mess of a man. Then have another beer, eat a packet of dairylea Dunkers, tell myself that everything will be okay, then cry myself to sleep listening to Tina Turners greatest hits.

well luckily with iOS7 no one cares for clear pics anymore. so i just blur everything, :)… and call it artistic! Blur de blur blur blur!! € p.s. (HA HA HA HA!)

So true! LOL!

This is a fantastic discussion that includes lots of different angles (no pun intended). Key takeaways: 1) There are lots of competing ideas about what makes an image "yours" - nobody will every 100% know the answer to this. It's always a judgment call. 2) A photo / image pool like @smug mentioned is an awesome idea!!! 3) @Kittsy's already a ninja. 4) @Uelsimon has it all figured out. Blur it, all will be well! Sooo funny. My take: Photography is a tough cookie and for sure one of the challenges app publishers face. But, in my opinion, it's only actual "photo apps" (think Instagram) are photo rich anyway - right? Most design / art in mobile is not photographic, it's vector. Of course tons of photos exist in tons of apps. I'm just saying that MORE apps use high quality vector for design, icons, layout, backgrounds, etc. and less use photography. If your app is a photo app then the content is usually UGC (User Generated Content) anyway - right? Very few photo-browsing apps where the app publisher provides the imagery get very far anyway so it's not that big of a deal. I don't think. Then again, this only one take (another pun) on it. Mine. The guy who couldn't shoot good photo if his life depended on it!

David is always here for the rescue!