Challenges and Terms

[vintagesnaps]

Since we've been having ongoing challenges, I decided to post (again) about the Terms and Rules for the site (which I haven't brought up in a long time).

I don't think site users should be asked to agree to open ended terms without specific use or time frames, such as granting 'permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use'. I don't feel like photographers should have to agree to that to be able to share and show their work.

Viewing ads seems a fair enough exchange for using the site.

 

[zombiesniper]

I have to agree. If you gain revenue by adds or membership support payment you should not expect to use members photos.

Glad I link most of mine which do not fall under this agreement.

 

[SquarePeg]

I’m not sure I understand what your objection to the terms of the site has to do with the challenges?

 

[snowbear]

I could be wrong, but I think the unlimited use is so the images can be legally re-posted on the site; nether nominations nor monthly challenge entries are posted by the original photographer. I have no idea how potential server changes might play into any of this.

 

[Overread]

I take it you mean this bit
"You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content."

Of the terms and conditions of the site. It's fairly standard for forums and note that it only pertains to the use of the content within connection to the service. In the context of the forum it means if you upload to the site you're allowing the site to show that content online.

I should also note that you can freely edit any post you make or any content to the galleries; so you can remove the content from the site at any point, at which time that licence ends because the content is no longer hosted.

 

[terri]

Agree with the last two posts here. The verbiage about publishing/re-publishing gives the site permission to take current content offline in the event of server upgrades or even the switch from platforms (like moving all content from v Bulletin to xen Foro a few years back).

I'm guessing your concerns stem from so-called "online contest" companies that want permission to take submitted images and have rights to use them to promote their business, indefinitely, whether you've "won" anything or not. TPF contests are extremely informal and not used to promote the site in any way. As Overread noted, you can edit or remove any content (with the exception of content that has been re-posted for voting purposes by a contest moderator). The TPF verbiage clearly states you retain copyright. Any images you have linked by third party sites can be broken by you, or you can always ask anyone on the team to remove contest content if you don't wish it to remain in the archives for some reason.

Do any of the last few posts help clarify the wording of the terms in a way that eases your concerns?

 

[snowbear]

Morguefile has opted to have display two versions of their royalty-free micro-stock image licensing: the official legalese, as well as plain English. Maybe this is something TPF might consider.

 

[snowbear]

I have to agree. If you gain revenue by adds or membership support payment you should not expect to use members photos.

Glad I link most of mine which do not fall under this agreement.

Flickr Terms (though they are a bit more specific):

9.2 With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo Services other than Yahoo Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo Services solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available.

Bold emphasis mine.

 

[SCraig]

And of course, despite all the clarifications, there is the clause that reads: "These terms may be changed at any time without notice." (bold emphasis mine)

I'm with Zombiesniper, there's no way I'd post any of my photographs directly on this or any other site because I do NOT grant this site or any other the right to publish or re-use anything. Not that they have any monetary value, and I do frequently give them away, but I do so with my permission.

 

[Overread]

SCraig technically any online host, barring your own website, has to have a clause that allows that host the legal right to display the uploaded content.

Please note that it does state "in connection with the Service" ergo the service of the forum itself.

It's only there so that the forum can legally show the photos that you've uploaded to show.


Yes the site admin does retain right to change the TC without consultation, but quite honestly lets not blow this out of proportion. We've never had any discussions or plants to monetize the forum in a way that would abuse our membership or their photography. The only income on the site comes from advertisements; sponsors and donations through the subscription option.
There have never been any plans to draw income from the userbase's photography and as the entire moderating team is comprised of photographers (as are several admin) its highly unlikely that it would ever happen.



I'm also pretty sure the sites TC is the bog standard one shipped with the forum software, we might have tweaked it at one point or another for clarity (I honestly can't recall if we have or not) but beyond that its just a standard bit of legal that sets out a basic set of terms for the site.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I was thinking about doing this week's challenge Sharon, but then what comes to mind is the last time the site changed and I (re)read the terms. I don't know if they changed then, I don't remember what they said when I first signed up.

It would be helpful I think Charlie for the site to say that, what the purpose is for what the terms state. I can't know ownership's intentions; I'm not even sure who owns the site currently (at least I don't think it says anywhere on here).

What you're saying Terri might be the purpose but the terms don't seem to specify that. I have to go by what the terms say - permanent, irrevocable, unlimited. You're right we all retain copyright to our photos, but to me this is about usage.

I just find what's current for me is broad and open to interpretation. I have on occasion posted a photo just for fun, then deleted it from my post later; but have to remember to go back and do that and make sure I remember what thread it was posted in. I've just gotten tired of having to do that every time I want to post a photo.

I don't think just because 'everybody' is doing something that it's necessarily the best thing to do. I'd like the site to consider writing terms more specific to the site rather than using 'standard' terms being used 'out there'. I'd like to see the terms be more specific and explanatory related to usage.

 

[SCraig]

SCraig technically any online host, barring your own website, has to have a clause that allows that host the legal right to display the uploaded content.

Please note that it does state "in connection with the Service" ergo the service of the forum itself.

It's only there so that the forum can legally show the photos that you've uploaded to show.

I agree that the purpose of the clause may be necessary however the phrase "You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content." does not reflect those limitations. If it's only for the purposes of legally showing the photos users have posted then simply say that instead of a clause that can mean far more. It's not hard, heck they can even cut-and-paste the line you wrote above. But I'd be willing to bet they won't.

What if the forum is sold tomorrow and the new owners decide to start publishing a magazine using user's photographs as content? Or even the current owners decide to do that? By those terms and conditions many people gave them permission to do so. Since they are the publishers it is still part of "The Service".

No thanks. You have a lot more respect for the owners of this site than I do.

 

[Overread]

The service would have to change for that to happen, at which point the original TC wouldn't be valid and a new one would have to be drafted to reflect the change in service. The change in service also wouldn't be capable of being retrospective to the previous TC - ergo it couldn't be changed to poach your photos.


The TC has been in standard form ever since the forums were started which is around 15 years or so ago.

I would also like to repeat that there's never been any discussion or plans to monetize the photos of members here. Heck the forum software likely couldn't even support such a feature with a huge re-write.


We'll give it a look to see if we can change it to be clearer in wording, even though you're still safe under the current TC.

 

[vintagesnaps]

What's being used as a standard on many sites to me often allows for a site to potentially use photos in unrestricted or unspecified ways. Just because 'everybody' does something that doesn't necessarily make it a good thing!

What I think seems inappropriate to do with creative work is to include 'permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license' to use, publish or republish content. Why is that necessary if a site has no intention of using photos other than to display on the site? I would think terms could be more specific related to usage on the site (for display/sharing on the website, or whatever would cover allowing for posting/sharing photos).

I know ownership changed since the site was started, and I don't see on here who currently owns it (although I thought it had been on here I don't see it now).