[Feature Request]: Support (license) links in Featured Image credits field

[s3nnet]

Feature Description

... to satisfy legal requirements with using non-CC0 images

[bjazmoore]

That would be nice. The block editor gets close if you add an caption that contains a link to the source it will render it when that page is rendered as in the first image below.

This next image shows what I set to do this.

This does not work in the WYSIWYG editor.

[s3nnet]

Thanks alot! However, it would be waaaay nicer, if clickable credit links in the credits label could become a cross-editor standard.
IMHO a simple mask for the credits label would be sufficient - Licensor - License - Link - Commercial use: yes or no - Bob's your uncle!
Plus, bonus points for a built-in license checker, e.g. Is the given license suitable for what I'm doing, may I edit the image etc.

[s3nnet]

Now we're getting there... Combine this with a built-in downloader for libre images from different providers and you get a super conveniant, legally bullet proof solution for your users' Featured Images 😂
Edit: Super duper bonus points for automagically importing all required license information from those providers 🛞
Edit 2: No need for any self-maintained image libraries with all the different licenses any more. I would be a happy man!

[dziudek]

It is just an issue with usage of {{ x }} instead of {{{ x }}} - reported to @bobmitro

[s3nnet]

Great!

[candidexmedia]

Now we're getting there... Combine this with a built-in downloader for libre images from different providers and you get a super conveniant, legally bullet proof solution for your users' Featured Images 😂

A built-in downloader would be nice, like the Pexels and Unsplash integrations available in other apps. Kdenlive (the free and open source video editor) also offers ways of downloading footage, audio, and music directly from the app.

That said, these websites aren't necessarily "legally bullet proof solutions". Because they rely on a large volume of user-generated content, some of them don't bother to (or don't have the resources to) vet the origin of the images being uploaded. I've seen certain photos being re-uploaded to different free stock sites by different people with different licenses.

On top of that, pictures with identifiable people in them may require additional legal permissions (such as model releases), which can vary from country to country. There's no way to ensure that the photographer uploading the photo did their due diligence, and that might be a lot of work for a free stock image site to manage (and verify the veracity of).

This blog and video from a photographer cover a lot of this, and I've had the same thing told to me by a journalism professor.

Then, we get into the topic of whether it's up to Publii to teach folks about licensing and build it into the app (as opposed to just, like, writing a blog about it on their site), and if that's a good use of their resources. It's possible that many website makers are using their own photos anyway.