Question about Flickr

[ApertureF11Sniper]

Thank you to everyone who took the time to say something more then Google it......

 

[Spirit Vision Photography]

"...I had read about Flickr that they have a parent company that is a stock photo site and it is in the fine print that you agree to when joining the site that you give them rights to your photos you upload and there for Flickr can sell your images as stock photos."

Can the OP please share the source for this?

That is incorrect. Flickr was bought by Smugmug. They do not claim ownership of your images, or sell them to anyone else.

 

[smoke665]

Yes, it's true that Flickr's parent company, SmugMug, does have a stock photo licensing service, and by uploading your photos to Flickr, you do grant SmugMug a license to use your photos on their stock photo website. However, it's worth noting that this license is non-exclusive and you retain the rights to your photos, meaning you can still use and license them yourself. Additionally, you can opt out of having your photos considered for the stock photo service by adjusting your settings on the site. It's always a good idea to read and understand the terms of service before uploading your photos to any website.

I'll have to call BS on this. In post #10 above I quoted the verbage direct from the Flickr terms of service. Further down you will find this-
"by uploading and/or posting any User Content to the Services, you grant SmugMug a perpetual, nonexclusive and royalty-free right to use the User Content (and the user name that is submitted in connection with such User Content) as is reasonably necessary in order to enable SmugMug to provide the Services, including to display the User Content on the Services."

This combined with the earlier quote doesn't mean that SmugMug owns your photos or has any right to license them without your consent, it means that you are allowing SmugMug to display them within your Flickr account. I believe you'll find this consistent with most photo sharing sites including here on TPF

The terms of service I quoted are in direct conflict to your statements above. If you have information to the contrary then please post your references. If I'm wrong then I'll thank you for correcting me and gained some valuable knowledge, but unsubstantiated internet myths create unnecessary worry for all of us.

 

[RacePhoto]

Since I do some selling online and believe me, you will not pay off the car or house and maybe a new Macro lens... in a couple of years? The reason I promote Wirestock, beyond the fact that if you join using my link, I get 10% for the first year. (and I hope you make a million dollars, it costs you nothing. Not taken out of your earnings)) is, for someone who wants to try selling stock photos, it's easy to join, they distribute to major agencies, they track everything and take 15% for keywords and distribution.

(spammy paragraph removed)

Now about Flickr and selling images. As far as I know and all the data I've seen, NO.

I don't know if this one is even alive anymore. Back in 2010:

"Flickr members can turn on a “Request to License” link on their photo pages. The link will show right next to the licensing information. When a member makes a request, Getty Images reviews the photographer’s work. They will contact the Flickr member and help handle details like permissions, releases, and pricing."

And on Flickr, help: Asking can we sell our images on Flickr?

"We can all order prints and books of our own photos through Flickr, but not other people's photos in that way.

With a paid-for account ('Pro') you are allowed to sell your own photos via your account (this is notionally not allowed from Free accounts), but you would have to organize printing, delivery and pricing yourself."

I hope that was helpful and as far as everything I know and can find, Flickr does not sell licenses for our images.

 

[snowbear]

I think this one has run it's course.