peoples using your photos (tumblr)

[DScience]

Hi all,

So recently i've noticed a lot of my photos on Flickr being used by people on a website called Tumblr.

Basically, it's a blogging site and people are posting my pics on their blog. They aren't claiming credit, and they even acknowledge that the photos aren't theirs, and they link them to my actual Flickr.

I'm just curious if anyone else has encountered this, and what your feelings are about this.

 

[benhasajeep]

Hi all,

So recently i've noticed a lot of my photos on Flickr being used by people on a website called Tumblr.

Basically, it's a blogging site and people are posting my pics on their blog. They aren't claiming credit, and they even acknowledge that the photos aren't theirs, and they link them to my actual Flickr.

I'm just curious if anyone else has encountered this, and what your feelings are about this.

Not sure how I feel about it. But if they are not trying to make money with it. Just reposting them. Not sure that is any different than you posting them on a open based viewing site. Now if they are using them in a way that disturbs you. You could go to tumblr and ask they be removed. But that would get to be a pain. Do you put a © and name on them? At least your getting your name out there.

 

[Rekd]

Should be good advertising for you.

 

[bigtwinky]

There was another website that used flickr to get images. I forget the name, but they were a type of travel website that had info on various cities and would hit flickr to get photos of the areas they want.

They would send you a note saying your photo was shortlisted and then another one if its chosen.

The difference is that they make money off their site... so they are using my photos (for free) to make money. Sure, they mentionned the photographer name and if someone clicks on the image it links back to flickr, but from what I saw, the pictures scrolled by fast.

Tumblr seems like just an information page. I would be up to allow people to use my images on there, as long as they don't make money.

 

[rocdoc]

My pics show up on different similar sites all the time. Since I don't think any of them are really that great and don't make a living off it, I am not too worried, but I do feel a bit uncomfortable. As long as they link to your flickr stream and you get credit there is no problem though - after all you make them public on flickr, there is no law against anyone linking to any public content. If on the other hand they publish your photos on a news site or anything else without linking to your page, they should ask your permission.

 

[bigtwinky]

I would also expect these people to ask to use your photo before just using it. Common curtesy (which not many people have these days, they figure if its on the web, its fair game)

 

[itznfb]

This is my primary reason for not using Flickr and I'm shocked that so many photographers still view Flickr as a valid repository for their work. Copyright infringement is almost encouraged on Flickr. There are so many applications that spider Flickr as if it were a free stock photo site that there is a high chance that one your photos or more is on someone's website somewhere without your knowledge. These apps just crawl through Flickr and pull a crapload of results matching a given search criteria and that's it, the user picks one and now it's on their site/blog. They use Flickrs own API and Flickr actually encourages this.

I only had about 40 photos on Flickr and every single one of them I found on at least 2 sites.

Here's how easy to implement into your own little search engine: http://www.flickr.com/services/api/flickr.photos.search.html

Flickr is a plague to the photography community.

 

[Rekd]

(quoted for posterity)

Copyright infringement is almost encouraged on Flickr.

Wait... what?? Is that a typo?? Wow.

On a serious note: The only stuff of mine they can get from flickr is the stuff I want them to get. You know, the stuff that's NOT PRIVATE!!?? :er:

 

[GeneralBenson]

Flickr is a plague to the photography community.

It's so true. It drives me nuts when I see professional photogs who have/encourage flickr. What people don't realize, is that blogging and web stuff is quickly becoming the new form of media, and all of this image usage is something that people used to have to pay photographers for in print. Now web publishers can just surf the web and and get free images from places like flickr, or dirt cheap images from places like iStock. It's all based of exploited non-professional photographers. There are so many people taking digital pictures these days, and uploading them to the web. This all based on the fact, that somewhere in that myriad of crap are some decent images, and the people that took them probably don't care if anyone uses them, and don't realize that image usage is worth money. It's exploitation, and there's no other way about it.

 

[itznfb]

(quoted for posterity)

Copyright infringement is almost encouraged on Flickr.

Wait... what?? Is that a typo?? Wow.

On a serious note: The only stuff of mine they can get from flickr is the stuff I want them to get. You know, the stuff that's NOT PRIVATE!!?? :er:

Wake up dude. I'm not trying to be insulting... but Flickr is a bad joke. With their open API it takes anyone with a little programming knowledge a couple hours to write a spidering engine that crawls all the photos and grabs whatever. Then they throw these search apps out on download sites and everyone uses them. It doesn't matter if they are private or not. Flickr does nothing to stop it. They even encourage the use of some of them. All my photos were private and everyone single one ended up either in a blog or on someone's site. One even ended up on a stock photo site.

 

[DScience]

Interesting responses from everyone. I guess I use Flickr not as a tool to advertise my photos. I'm more of the social community type, and I like the interaction that goes on between flickr friends. One thing I have changed is made it so people cannot download my images. Thus they can only view them at medium size.

I guess if I was attempting to make money off of this hobby, I might worry more. But I agree with most of you that since they aren't using my photos for money, and the photos link back to my flickr, it's probably not a bad thing to have them out there. Plus, maybe someone out there is finding enjoyment out of my photos. If I can bring any bit of positivity into the world, i'm all for that.

 

[Rekd]

(quoted for posterity)

Copyright infringement is almost encouraged on Flickr.

Wait... what?? Is that a typo?? Wow.

On a serious note: The only stuff of mine they can get from flickr is the stuff I want them to get. You know, the stuff that's NOT PRIVATE!!?? :er:

Wake up dude. I'm not trying to be insulting... but Flickr is a bad joke. With their open API it takes anyone with a little programming knowledge a couple hours to write a spidering engine that crawls all the photos and grabs whatever. Then they throw these search apps out on download sites and everyone uses them. It doesn't matter if they are private or not. Flickr does nothing to stop it. They even encourage the use of some of them. All my photos were private and everyone single one ended up either in a blog or on someone's site. One even ended up on a stock photo site.

If that's the case, I'm sorry.

Unfortunately I don't see it. If you could provide me with proof (that the APIs can take private photos without your permission) I will use that get my money back from them and jump on the **** flickr bandwagon.

 

[itznfb]

The API calls directly into Flickr backend repository. Direct linking won't work as far as I know. So if you pull the link from a search and try to link back to a private photo it won't work. I'm also not sure if you're able to pull full resolution photos or not as all of mine were uploaded at 800x530 and I just left it as that it a pretty tough res to print. However it works well for viewing online.

All the ones I've found of my own photos have since been removed. One good thing is I've never really had any push back from someone using my photo. They have all just taken it down without question.

The Flickr TOS does not protect you in any way but it does clearly state that they do not assume ownership of uploaded photos, but they do reserve the right to use them in any publicly accessible are of Flickr/Yahoo!

 

[IgsEMT]

Didn't read above:
Watermark it across, i.e. upper left corner to bottom right corner. :thumbup:

 

[itznfb]

Didn't read above:
Watermark it across, i.e. upper left corner to bottom right corner. :thumbup:

You could. I've never personally run into this but I hear stories from others about their watermarks actually being removed. I don't know why someone would go to all that trouble... spend as much time practicing photography as they do removing watermarks and they would probably be a good photographer.

However.... there are many reasons I had become frustrated with flickr and using just about every other service I've never run into these issues any where else. So not using flickr easily solves the issue for me.

I understand people like flickr and that's fine... but people should know their open API is a hazard.

I'll end my ranting
/rant