mickfly Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Can I assume that most regular people who shoot with their phones intend to keep the pictures?, but either lose them or forget to back them up anywhere hence reducing the overall pool of available images in the future. When everyone shot with film they almost always made prints, which, even if they are languishing in drawers somewhere do actually exist, whereas the phone pics just disappear into the ether after a few pass rounds between friends. Even Stockimo shooters who are new to photography might not see the value of archiving the pictures they take. So, in the future, will the pool of high quality pictures from this period become relatively smaller compared to what is available from just 15 years ago? Am I making any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Crean Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Interesting thoughts… Wonder what percentage end up on facebook where theoretically they are archived? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Todd Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 A lot of people also have cloud backups set automatically their phones for iCloud, dropbox, Google, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 Interesting thoughts… Wonder what percentage end up on facebook where theoretically they are archived? I should think a large amount are on Facebook, but as people close their accounts do they download all the content to their PC's? I'm not sure what Facebook will do with all the content, which they don't have copyright for when it eventually closes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 It's true that we now have both disposable cameras (e.g. phones) and disposable images, but I think that the vast numbers of pictures being taken these days will ensure that the available pool keeps growing in one way or another. Not sure about the "high quality" part, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Interesting thoughts… Wonder what percentage end up on facebook where theoretically they are archived? I should think a large amount are on Facebook, but as people close their accounts do they download all the content to their PC's? I'm not sure what Facebook will do with all the content, which they don't have copyright for when it eventually closes. Oh, how mistaken you are. Ever read Facebook's twitter's and instagram's user agreement? They own copyright to everything of yours that you publish, and that includes words and pictures. And even if you delete it, if it has ever been shared, its there for facebook to use. Think of all the Alamy shots that pass through twitter. Once on twitter, Twitter has the rights to sell them is they wish. Always read the fine print. Edited to add: An interesting read here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/social-media/9780565/Facebook-terms-and-conditions-why-you-dont-own-your-online-life.html Edited again to add that instagram reversed its decision to have rights to users photos. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Interesting thoughts… Wonder what percentage end up on facebook where theoretically they are archived? I should think a large amount are on Facebook, but as people close their accounts do they download all the content to their PC's? I'm not sure what Facebook will do with all the content, which they don't have copyright for when it eventually closes. Oh, how mistaken you are. Ever read Facebook's twitter's and instagram's user agreement? They own copyright to everything of yours that you publishJill, and that includes words and pictures. And even if you delete it, if it has ever been shared, its there for facebook to use. Think of all the Alamy shots that pass through twitter. Once on twitter, Twitter has the rights to sell them is they wish. Always read the fine print. Edited to add: An interesting read here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/social-media/9780565/Facebook-terms-and-conditions-why-you-dont-own-your-online-life.html Edited again to add that instagram reversed its decision to have rights to users photos. Jill True, if you post anything on social media, you've basically sold your soul to the company store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 I am aware of the claim that 'they' own copyright on everything you upload, but I would like to see the 'contract' tested in court... or has it already been challenged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 Could you afford to take Facebook to court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gaffen Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 As a recent contributor to Stockimo, a well as a regular contributor to Alamys Stock library, I always back up my digital images, both from my Digital SLR's and now, my iPhone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
York Photographer Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 The whole FB copyright thing is a mute point, If they use or sell the images for use in advertising, they haven't got model releases, and would leave themselves wide open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 The whole FB copyright thing is a mute point, If they use or sell the images for use in advertising, they haven't got model releases, and would leave themselves wide open. Seems to me it's only a moot point until they use an image that doesn't require a model release . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 I see photos from Facebook used in Yahoo news stories and other outlets all the time. Facebook even puts © FACEBOOK over any watermark or persons copyright notice that is on the image. I have also seen a few of my FB friends photos used in Facebook ads that appear on the side of the Facebook page. I removed my photos a few years ago and for my own photos,just include a link from my paid website which shows a small watermarked image L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 I rarely put a picture on Facebook, or Twitter,for just that reason and certainly nothing of commercial value or size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariaJ Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 I thought fb could only use your images if you had set them to Public view. Regardless, if I post any images to fb, it's usually not directly, but through a link to another site, like FAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Hmmm . . . a thought: I never place my images on FB (no account for a start) nor Twitter (no account for another start . . . ), but what if some tosser drags one of my images off say Alamy or another place and posts it to FB . . . are FB able to exercise their copyright-grab on my image given that I did not post it there, did not authorise it to be posted there, and do not agree with it being there? . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariaJ Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 From FB: 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 From FB: 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. That's quite clear . . . but it doesn't cover someone posting someone else's work. I have had one PM suggestion that you have to declare (somewhere, perhaps by just using the service . . . ) that you are the holder of an image's copyright before you post it to FB etc . . . so therefore if you aren't, FB can't take that copyright . . . not sure if that's correct, and knowing FB, they'll have a weasel way around it, just like the little weasel qualification contained in the last sentence of theirs quoted by Maria dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted November 23, 2014 Author Share Posted November 23, 2014 Could you afford to take Facebook to court? Certainly not Martin, I was just curious, as the 'contract' seems very one sided and that can be a breaker in contract disputes. MariaJ: I have most of my privacy settings very high in FB... BUT I do post fairly low res pictures on there (an ego thing, of course) and also on Flickr. If I was more confident of my 'creative' pictures passing muster at Alamy I would remove them from the other vanity sites and have them here, although it doesn't mean that I am assuming that there is a market for them as stock. Another point I meant to make in the first post was really that phone pictures do not stand scrutiny at large sizes, and when the Instagram type filters become boring and cheesy, will they all fall by the wayside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted November 23, 2014 Author Share Posted November 23, 2014 From FB: 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. That's quite clear . . . but it doesn't cover someone posting someone else's work. I have had one PM suggestion that you have to declare (somewhere, perhaps by just using the service . . . ) that you are the holder of an image's copyright before you post it to FB etc . . . so therefore if you aren't, FB can't take that copyright . . . not sure if that's correct, and knowing FB, they'll have a weasel way around it, just like the little weasel qualification contained in the last sentence of theirs quoted by Maria dd Why do people make PM suggestions on a forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 From FB: 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. That's quite clear . . . but it doesn't cover someone posting someone else's work. I have had one PM suggestion that you have to declare (somewhere, perhaps by just using the service . . . ) that you are the holder of an image's copyright before you post it to FB etc . . . so therefore if you aren't, FB can't take that copyright . . . not sure if that's correct, and knowing FB, they'll have a weasel way around it, just like the little weasel qualification contained in the last sentence of theirs quoted by Maria dd Why do people make PM suggestions on a forum? Dunno . . . but why on earth not? I PM people all the time, and receive similar . . . why not? Oh . . . your use of quote function (above) needs just a tad more work dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Any photos I post on FB I usually remove a couple of weeks later. They have disappeared down the newsfeed and I am assuming most people have seen them. They are always low res. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I am not sure the size factor is true. There are a fair few people producing gallery prints (at premium prices) from phone pictures.Might be true for traditional landscape work but for art or decor prints, most definitely size is not a problem it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickfly Posted November 28, 2014 Author Share Posted November 28, 2014 Interesting read regarding Instagram earners. http://linkis.com/www.theguardian.com/ipFhM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.