The Copyright Act does not specify any citation requirements beyond the source of the material used and, if available, the name of the creator (ie:Creator, Source). While there is no legal requirement to attribute works in the public domain to their creator(s), doing so is an important part of maintaining academic integrity. Generally, image citations should meet the same requirements as a text citation; that is, a reader should be able to find the source of the image, and the image itself, based on the information in the citation.
If permission to use the image is obtained from the copyright holder, the copyright holder may require a particular citation style or that certain information be included. Examples of where permission requirements go beyond the basic copyright requirements are licensed library databases, creative commons licenses, and individual use agreements.
Below are image citation examples based on the minimum requirements of the Copyright Act and some common citation styles. Please refer to the citation practices of your discipline for more specific details. Include the citation as close to the image as possible, within the limitations of the medium.
All Creative Commons (CC) licences require the image user to attribute the creator of the image, but how that attribution can be provided is flexible depending on the type of licence and the medium in which the image is being used. Depending on where the image will be used different citation formats are necessary to convey all the required information. In an online environment hyperlinks can be used to minimize the length of the image citation; in a print resource the citation will be longer because all the required information must be written out in full.
Online image databases are sites such as Flickr, Wikimedia Commons, or Getty Images. Some of them are free to use (Flickr) and some are commercial (Getty). The attribution or citation required depends on the individual database. Each database should have a terms of use or copyright statement laying out what is and is not permissible to do with the images in their collection and how the images should be attributed.
Many of the free databases, like Flickr and Wikimedia Commons, use Creative Commons (CC) licenses to make the images available for reuse. In some cases, all images uploaded to the database are available under the same CC license; in other cases, it is up to the creator/ uploader to specify which type of CC license will be applied to each image. It is the creator, not the database owner, who retains copyright to the image. If you are using an image with a CC license from an online database, follow the attribution requirements specified by the CC license and the image creator. (See the Creative Commons Images section of this guide for more information on citing CC images.)
A citation for an image from a published source requires, at minimum, the creator of the image and the source of the image. It is good practice to also include the image title. The general format would be:
If including the full reference directly under the image is not appropriate for the project it is possible to include a short attribution under the image with a full citation or attribution statement in a reference page at the end of the work or in a footnote, much like an in-text citation.
At a minimum, the image citation should include: Creator, Image title: Source. Many publication style manuals, including APA and MLA, have more specific and detailed requirements for citing images from digital databases. Some style guides make a distinction between images that are copies of physical art and images that exist only in a digital format. Refer to the citation practices specific to your discipline if you are following a particular citation style. Below are a few examples of APA and MLA style (adapted from SFU: Finding and Using Online Images).
In addition to information on the public domain available on the Copyright at UBC website, the Canadian Association of Research Libraries has published a FAQ on term extension that is available on their website. [Read More]
If you need more books/libraries, you can upgrade to the 1,000 plan which gives you 1,000 books and unlimited libraries. There are other admin and collaborative features available with a paid subscription - all the details can be found at bookcreator.com/pricing.
There is also volume pricing available for schools (for 5 licenses or more) and districts wishing to purchase multiple licenses. Use our quote generator at bookcreator.com/quote. And if you're ordering more than 40 licenses we can discuss customized pricing options with you.
Anyone who takes a photo or creates their own original artwork, and posts it online, has the right to be acknowledged as the creator of that image. They automatically own the copyright for that photo, which means that legally, they have the right to decide where and how that image can be used.
Navigating music licensing is crucial for enhancing video projects with the perfect soundtrack. This guide simplifies the complexities surrounding copyrighted, royalty-free, and public-domain music, alongside practical advice for using music on platforms like YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram. Aimed at both beginners and seasoned creators, this blog provides essential insights for integrating music legally and effectively into your videos.
Copyright in music protects the creator's original works from unauthorised use (using it without their permission), granting them exclusive rights to their compositions. Imagine copyright as a protective bubble around your favourite song, ensuring the artist's hard work is rewarded and respected. This bubble means you need permission to use the music in your video, which is where licensing comes in.
This category includes music protected by copyright laws, meaning the creator retains exclusive rights to their work. Using copyrighted music typically requires obtaining permission from the copyright holder, which may involve negotiating terms and paying a licensing fee. This process ensures that creators are compensated for their work and that the music is used in a way that respects their preferences.
Royalty-free music, on the other hand, is licensed to allow purchasers to pay a one-time fee to use the music without paying any ongoing royalties. This doesn't mean the music is free; instead, it's free from the need to pay royalties for each use or in each specific project. Royalty-free music often comes with certain conditions regarding how and where the music can be used. However, these conditions are generally less restrictive than those for copyrighted music, making it an appealing option for content creators looking for cost-effective and legally precise music options.
Royalty-free music provides a practical alternative for creators needing quality music for their projects without the complexity or expense of licensing individual copyrighted works. It's an especially useful resource for those working under tight budgets or deadlines.
Music can enter the public domain for several reasons, such as the copyright expiring or the creator explicitly relinquishing their rights. Utilising public-domain music in your projects is straightforward because there are no copyright restrictions.
A sync (synchronisation) licence is granted to synchronise music with visual media, including films, TV shows, commercials, video games, and online content, aligning the audio track with moving images or other visual content.
Among these, sync licences are the most relevant to content creators, especially those involved in video production and editing. Sync licences are critical for ensuring that the integration of music with visual content is legally compliant, enhancing the emotional and narrative impact of the content without infringing on copyright laws.
By securing a sync licence, content creators ensure that their use of copyrighted music in videos is legally sound, which not only respects the rights of the music creators but also enhances the quality and appeal of the video content itself.
For beginner or entry-level content creators, navigating the world of sync licences may seem daunting due to the complexity and potential cost involved. However, understanding when it's realistic to pursue a sync licence is crucial for planning your content strategy and budget accordingly. There are always some factors to consider:
For smaller projects with a limited audience, the cost of obtaining a sync licence might not justify the investment. As your audience grows and your projects become more ambitious, investing in sync licences becomes more viable.
As you transition from hobbyist projects to more professional work, such as paid commissions or commercial content, sync licences become increasingly essential to maintain legality and professional integrity.
Once you start generating revenue from your content or have access to a larger budget, investing in a sync licence for a specific, impactful track can elevate your project's quality and viewer engagement.
Suppose you're working on a project in partnership with a brand or sponsor. In that case, they may allocate a budget for music licensing, making it realistic to obtain sync licences for higher-profile tracks. They may even ask for all necessary documentation as part of their signing off procedure.
Some platforms and music libraries offer pre-cleared tracks for licensing at more affordable rates, which can be a good starting point for creators looking to legally use copyrighted music without the high cost of direct licensing negotiations.
Offers a vast library of royalty-free music and sound effects. Known for its high-quality tracks and simple licensing, Epidemic Sound is a favourite among content creators for its ease of use and wide variety of genres.
Creative Commons music represents a boon to creatives, offering a range of works shared by artists under flexible terms that facilitate their use in various projects, including videos. Utilising Creative Commons music requires adherence to specific licence conditions, including attribution, non-commercial use, and no derivative works.
b37509886e