Urgent question for mytake owners: did you know that most of the images you are using on this website are copyright?

I recently discovered that many of the images people upload onto these mytakes (and internet articles in general) are in fact copyright. Although the content could be covered by fair use policy (e. g. commentary or criticism), it's sketchy because the images are often used for illustration purposes rather than specifically commentary or criticism and corporations that copyright this content probably have better lawyers than individuals on this site do. You can be sued for up to $10,000.

Further complications arise when you take into account users that do not reside in the US and America has a notorious history of extraditing individuals for online activity that was not even anything illegal by their own country's laws. To make things worse, owners cannot delete mytakes they wrote in the past, nor can they delete images that were mistakenly uploaded and you cannot argue that you "did not intend to infringe copyright" (ignorance is not an excuse by law).

I'm not saying you should all be freaking out if you've posted image content on mytakes like I have, since the chances of the original artist discovering the content is slim (but not non-existent) and you *might* be able argue "fair use" (maybe!). However, it's definitely something to consider next time you write a mytake. GAG should better inform users of fair use policy and update site features so images can be removed from previous mytakes.

By the way, if you want to check out if you can use an image or not, check out the advanced search function on google images. You can filter out copyright images and select the option "free to use or share" under usage rights. You will be surprised at how many images on google image search are actually copyrighted (the vast majority).

Hopefully @Fathoms77 will come across this and the GAG team will have a solution.


You can disavow mytakes, but this probably would not stop the original artist from being able to track down the owner with data provided by google.
I recommend giving users the option to remove earlier images and replace them with a diverse selection of non-copyright content from a GAG gallery that is categorised by the main themes people tend to discuss on this website (dating; trending & news; entertainment & arts; society & culture; etc.)


Most Helpful Guy

  • Thanks for your concern!

    We do encourage you to use pictures that aren't tagged or watermarked, but it's not a critical issue. If the owner of a particular image has an issue, they typically just ask the site to remove it and that's that. But as we rarely see any such request, it gives you an idea of how lax things are in that department.

    Still, please do try to grab pics from Google Images that aren't watermarked. And let me add that I'd like to see some nice high-res pictures; good media is more likely to grab the eye. :) As for why we need images... come on. Ever seen an article ANYWHERE online that doesn't have at least one pic? The Internet has become a hugely visual medium and sadly, nobody reads much, so the more media, typically the better.

    Of course, we'd never discourage a great, well-written, personal story. Hell, we love 'em. :P

    • I fully understand the need for good content and images. However, for the legal side of things, perhaps it would be good to have a tutorial that explains to GAGGERS how to find non-copyright content, e. g. a video that explains how to filter for licenses on google search that appears whenever somebody goes to write a mytake OR an actual function on GAG that automatically reverse-searches images to detect if they are copyright and prevent users from uploading those images. These are just some suggestions but I think it is good to address this issue more thoroughly on a site where it is mandatory to post images on mytakes and does not allow you to remove those images at a later time.


    • Show All
    • and this should apply to the comments sections also.

    • "And let me add that I'd like to see some nice high-res pictures; good media is more likely to grab the eye."

      Could you please increase the max resolution of the images in myTakes. It's extremely hard to read the texts in the images on mobile (having high resolution).

Have an opinion?

What Girls Said 2

  • That's interesting information.

    • Could you tag in @Fathoms77?

    • he's tagged in so never mind.

  • Crap, I'm dead then

    • please can you tag in @Fathoms77 for me?

    • he's tagged in so never mind.

What Guys Said 3

  • as long as you are not making money from using these pictures they are not gonna do anything, maybe a copyright agency may ask GAG to remove certain pictures, that can happen yes.

    • I don't know all the details, but they could theoretically have the power to sue if they wanted. Some people are greedy and $10,000 is a lot.

    • Show All
    • "why would they sue us if we are not using the pictures for commercial purposes"

      for money - they don't need any other incentive to do so and commercial purposes is not the only legal grounds on which a person can sue for copyright purposes.

      "copyrighted pictures are turned into memes and shared over the world on a daily basis, so I don't think the chance of being sued is high though."

      true, but it is probably easier to track down GAG users.

      could you tag in @Fathoms77 for me?

    • @Fathoms77
      would they ever win the legal battle? i dont know man.

  • Did you know it is called fair use? I swear people think they know copyright laws when they don't.

    • I didn't say I know everything, hence why I am posting a question not a mytake. If you have more information, please inform me.

    • That's an informative link but I referred to it as 'fair use' in the question summary, about three times. the reason I asked for more information was because I thought you were implying it was NOT called fair use:

      "Did you know it is called fair use?"

      I thought you were questioning the way I was using the term "fair use".

      Anyway, that link is for American law. Do you know what the criteria would be for an overseas case, say if the person did not reside in the US and used a copyright image? What about if the person was a composer and used copyright images on music videos to enhance the viewing experience and attract a wider audience?

  • The whole fact they force you to add frigging pictures to mytakes is annoying enough.

Loading... ;