Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
  • Jimi Wikman
    Jimi Wikman

    Google test new image metadata for licensable images badge

    Google is beta testing a new way for sites to display licensing information on images that appear in Google Image search. The new licensable image badge uses either IPTC image metadata or a new structured data element. This will make license information a whole lot more visible in the search results, which is a good thing.

    This new way for Google to show license information for images has been done in collaboration with CEPIC, which is short for Coordination of European Picture Agencies Stock, Press and Heritage, since June 2018. IPTC and DMLA has also been involved in this new way to help display license information for images in Google Image search.

    Quote

    The CEPIC organization appreciates very much the effort Google Images has shown with our organization and all its members, together with IPTC and DMLA to resolve this crucial issue for our industry, informing consumers about the importance and value of creative photography.

    This new image badge will show up in the image itself during the search and when you click on an image it will also add additional information in the details view.

    licensable-images.png

     

    The two new attributes you can use in the metadata to get this to show up once the feature is released are:

    • license - A URL to a page that describes the license governing an image’s use. For example, it could be the terms and conditions that you have on your website. Where applicable, it could also be a Creative Commons License (for example, BY-NC 4.0).
    • acquireLicensePage -A URL to a page where the user can find information on how to license that image. Here are some examples:
      • A check-out page for that image where the user can select specific resolutions or usage rights
      • general page that explains how to contact you

     

    This new badge also support standard IPTC tags. This means that in many cases this will show up with no additional effort. That is assuming the image already have the Web Statement of Rights and the Licensor URL meta data filled in.

    In the event that you have both the IPTC tags and markup metadata, then Google will use the markup metadata. This is good because that way the image can have the original license, but a different license can be added based on the site itself if they have made a deal with the original creator for example.

    For photographers I don't think this will be any changes in the workflow as I think most are already adding the metadata needed. For digital designers however this is not as common so some changes probably will be needed in most workflows. For content owners and system developers the new metadata will need some additional work.

    This is similar to when the canonical tag was introduced, but it will be much slower to implement as there are no incentive to add this, at least not in the same way as for the canonical tag which could boost your SEO scores.

    Personally I love this and I will absolutely implement this for this blog and other areas where I use images. Not for my own sake, but to make sure the creators get the recognition they deserve.


    • Interresting 1


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    There are no comments to display.



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By ©Jimi Wikman
      France is trying to use an already confusing and illogical Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market to force Google to pay for links to news articles for french news papers. As expected Google has responded that they will simply remove the news snippets in question to avoid any license fee's. That did not sit well with France who are now trying to sue Google.
      To me it is amazing how these things keep popping up from countries like France, Germany and Spain. Anyone who understand Internet and how search engines work would see that asking a service provider to pay for providing service is backwards. For some reason this does not seem to resonate with certain people when dealing with copyright and especially media.
      As France now have taken the Directive to become law in France they somehow had the hubris to think that Google, or any search engine for that matter, would actually pay for doing the french news the favor of highlighting their content and drive traffic to them. Naturally Google followed this new law by simply removing the content that require legal fees. For some reason this apparently was surprising to the French, even if the Germans have already tried this and failed miserably.
      So what are they arguing about really? Well, it is the so called "rich links", or rich snippets where you will see a small image, the title of the article and a short text. In a blog post from Google they have responded with how they will handle this according to the new law in France.

      This has made the French cultural minister Franck Riester angry. For some reason he actually thought that Google would actually start paying for helping the media companies to get quality traffic to their sites. It is illogical in so many ways that I do not think he really understand what Google do or how Copyright works.
      If you hold copyright over something you should of course have the control of how others use your creative work, or even if they are allowed to. There is nothing strange about that. It is also in everyone's right to not use or reference that same creative work if I do not want to. That is how Copyright works.
      Google is a service provider who collect information about websites and create a database over those sites to make them searchable. This is a free service that anyone can use and as you know Google is not the only search engine you can use. Google make money by allowing advertisement on the search result pages.
      So what France now have done is that have made it illegal so show image and text previews in the rich snippets presented in search results. This is done by invoking the right to control Copyrighted material, which is well within their right. What they do not understand is that Google have the right to choose not to infringe on that same copyright by changing what they display in the results.
      For some reason France want to force Google to infringe on Copyrighted material so they can be fined for doing so. That is illogical as you are basically forcing criminal behavior by legislation. That is an act that by itself should be illegal if forced, but it seems that Franck Riester do not understand that very simple concept.
      We will see how this farce plays out in it's absurdity and I predict that the french media will suffer the same way as their German counterparts did previously. They had to make good with Google and give them permission to present the links without paying, which made that lawsuit pretty useless. I think the french will have the same experience and it's strange that they do not understand this from previous experiments like this.
      What do you think?
×
×
  • Create New...