Facebook Photographers beware

[The_Traveler]

Proposed Facebook change in Terms of Service

"how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition: 1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos
(IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to
your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable,
sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you
post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when
you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared
with others, and they have not deleted it.
2. When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the
recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may
persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available "

Discussion on ASMP
Beware Facebook's New Terms of Service | American Society of Media Photographers

 

[KmH]

Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, goes even further.

The average person is clueless to the rights grabs.

There is a an article about Instagram's TOS in this months Rangefinder magazine's monthly Legal issues column that is written by Victor Perlman.

 

[Derrel]

Oh noes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Urban Dictionary: oh noes

Well, that's IT! The LAST STRAW!

All 1.06 billion active Facebook users need to STOP posting pictures, right NOW!

Facebook by the numbers: 1.06 billion monthly active users | Internet & Media - CNET News

 

[cgipson1]

Easily solved.. don't post anything that you don't want stolen!

 

[runnah]

Look on the bright side, at least one person wants to own your photos.

 

[cgipson1]

Look on the bright side, at least one person wants to own your photos.

If by one person, you mean a huge, brain dead social networking entity... I would agree, because they know that they can profit from it. This stuff is part of the reason Stock Photography is in the dumps now...

 

[KmH]

.... and gets worse by the day.

 

[Derrel]

Look on the bright side, at least one person wants to own your photos.

If by one person, you mean a huge, brain dead social networking entity... I would agree, because they know that they can profit from it. This stuff is part of the reason Stock Photography is in the dumps now...

Uh...no...the reason stock photography is in the dumps right now is because of wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more images now being produced by wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more shooters, using the low cost of high-resolution digital cameras, as opposed to film and film scanners. Not to mention discount air fares, easy travel, and world-wide, real-time scouting and weather/location data assessment made possible by the internet.

Need to update the surfing photos? Hit the web for surf reports from 19 different breaks...check the waves on web-cam yourself, BEFORE driving 100 miles to the site...no more wasted trips...and when you GET THERE, there are 5 guys set up on the beach,shooting...

One of my longtime photography buddies Mike W. fondly recalls the heydays of stock sales...today, high-quality images are EASILY FOUND by buyers. In the old days, buyers simply HAD to go to stock agencies...today, Mike's web-based server purchasing queries can be populated with keyworded images from his 30+ year collection of digitized still film images and more-modern digital-origin images, within 30 seconds. Buyers can have an instantly-formatted .HTML page sent to them in seconds, filled with photos matching their exact keyworded needs...

Sorry, but you cannot blame something that has NOT YET HAPPENED on Facebook as a reason for the decline of the stock photo biz. Come on man...this knee-jerk reaction is getting old man...

If your stock photo sales are slumping, maybe you need to update your images, update your skills,and drastically update your marketing and sales channels...just a thought...

 

[table1349]

Facebook....? Is that like a coffee table book with pictures of peoples faces??

Instagram. Is that like instant tea. Just add boiling water to have a refreshing hot beverage?

The funniest thing about social media is that it isn't social. Social is actually talking to a real live human being or beings.

Social Media is taking to real live human beings while Uncle Derrel and Aunt Kathy show slides of their last vacation.

 

[amolitor]

It doesn't hurt to be aware of these things, but in reality it actually affects almost nobody. It's worth thinking about it to determine if this is actually going to harm you at all. The answer for virtually everyone is 'no, it will not harm me in the slightest' and then you can get on with your lives.

This knee-jerk "oh no they are going to steal my pictures" reaction is, in virtually all cases, completely silly. Facebook doesn't want your pictures.

 

[Derrel]

"I put all my best, top-grade chit out on the sidewalk and left it there for weeks and weeks on end...and somebody had the audacity to STEAL some of it!"

Imagine that!!!! people making off with stuff that's just "left there"...

Some things are so BASIC that it's hard to understand why people do not understand how the world works. As cgipson1 said in post #4, and as we ALL ought to know...one does NOT put A-list material on-line for "free" viewing without great risk of said material being "stolen". Just the same way one does not leave valuable possessions out "on the sidewalk" for months on end. They might be "stolen".

"Duh."

 

[sleist]

Isn't this more about Facebook protecting themselves from the actions of their own members and avoid being sued?
I don't see why Facebook would want peoples photos for anything what so ever.

I deleted my FB page ages ago so perhaps I'm just an idiot about all this.

I find pseudo photo competitions that actually own your photos after you enter to be much more distasteful.

 

[amolitor]

Any social networking site that isn't grabbing as much rights as possible to all your content is a foolish one. The business models are pretty thin to start with, they need to nail down as much territory as possible to open up as much as possible for monetization.

There's some pretty interesting stuff in terms of advertising that's a possible for photographs which I predict we'll be seeing pretty soon.

 

[jaomul]

Does the resolution thing matter? If you upload at net sizes with lowish res? But the point above about not posting anything you don't want used makes most sense

 

[amolitor]

jaomul, that depends entirely on who you are and what your needs are. The vast majority of people will be harmed not in the slightest by the devil himself stealing all their pictures at full resolution.

If you're a professional or otherwise need to protect your intellectual property, then you need to work out what you can and cannot afford to give away free licenses for.

Keep in mind that if you are a professional or otherwise subject to contractual requirements, which is statistically speaking 0% of all photographers, you may actually be required to not upload things to social networking sites now. If you're selling exclusive licenses to things, you can't be giving away other licenses to places like facebook or instagram can you? The license you're selling as exclusive isn't, and that's gonna be a problem.

If you don't know what any of that means, then you probably don't care and can get on with your life. Upload the big ones to everywhere. It won't hurt you.