Attribution when creating images from other sources

Question

I'm writing a paper where I've created several images using clipart from various sources. Some sources are Creative Commons, some just require attribution while others require a specific disclaimer (e.g. Microsoft and Android logo usage) with specific wording.

My first thought was to have a 'Credit' section:

CREDIT

Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other counties[53]. The Android robot is reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according to the terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License[54]. Figure 1 Physical System Architecture incorporates derived works for an aerial vehicle[55], surface vehicle[56], submersible vehicle[57] and a communications server[58]. Figure 9 Testing Configuration incorporates derived works for the drone[55] and clock[59]. This diagram also utilises the following third party images: server[60], node.js logo[61], laptop[62], server[60], penguin tux[63], Microsoft Windows™ logo[53] and Android™ logo[54].

In my references section I then have the correct references as per IEEE formatting style, for example:

[60] mimooh, “Clipart - Server,” 12-Aug-2011. [Online]. Available: http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi. [Accessed: 13-Oct-2013].

So my question is two fold:

1. Is above approach is valid?
2. Do I meet creative commons requirements by the above (see Android reference)?

I've tried finding style guide information on composite images and how to deal with creative commons but not had much luck. I have also not been able to find any example papers that deal with this.

The images are as follows (I'll have to add credits below):

• N. Halftermeyer, Parrot AR.Drone 2.0 flying. 2012.
• U. S. N. photo by J. S. J. Ebalo, Camp Lemonier, Djibouti (Oct. 26, 2004) (RELEASED) Robot used by Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit (EODMU).
• MKFI, Bofors Double Eagle Mk II remotely operated underwater vehicle used for naval mine clearing by Finnish Navy. Photographed in Turku Forum Marinum during the Finnish Navy 2011 anniversary.
• C. Berscheidt, Built-to-Spec Raspberry Pi Case. 2012.

Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other counties. The Android robot is reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according to the terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

• rihard, “Clock + Calendar,” link
• mimooh, “Server,” link
• “node.js.” link
• metalmarious, “Laptop,” link
• L. E., Simon Budig, Anja Gerwinski, Penguin Tux, the Linux Mascot. 2012.

Answer 1

I think it's somewhat unusual for academic papers to have a Credits (I would use the plural) or Picture credits, for two reasons:

1. Academics usually strive to produce their own content, rather than reuse.
2. Most people wouldn't follow the proper attribution/disclaimer rules.

I, however, think your way of doing things is very adequate. Your Creative Commons attribution seems correct: as you can see here and there, the CC attribution requirements are actually pretty flexible.

---

The one thing I might do differently is the use of references for each of the attributions. It seems a bit overkill (takes up more space) and somewhat blurs the purpose of the references list. I would simply put the attributions inline in the text:

This diagram also utilises the following third party images: server (by mimooh, 12-Aug-2011, http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi), etc.

Also note that, at least for openclipart.org but also for other online resources, you can actually abbreviate the URL without loss of functionality: http://openclipart.org/detail/155101 instead of http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi.