Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Use of Facebook is free, so instead of charging you money we'll just rip you off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deleted

Edited by isphoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a pretty good rundown of this: http://www.snopes.com/computer/facebook/privacy.asp

 

Facebook doesn't own anything you post, you just grant them rights to use it, which is why I never put up anything important back when I had an account. Their little behavioral experiment was the last straw, so I left.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any body have any idea how this affects sharing to FB from sites like Fine Arts America? I am a member at FAA, and I know many there share to FB, they even have their own app set up if you select it to share. I have never shared, but if I do, or some one else shares my image, does that assign rights to FB?? Just too many unknowns to consider. It all seems just another case of very low and underhanded, but legal, behavior by corporate America to enrich the already wealthy off the sweat and hard work of others. I will never, ever upload anything to FB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under copyright law no one but you (or your appropriately and formally authorised agent) can transfer your copyright (or even licence copyright). FB might argue that the user who shared your image had said they had the right to (check FB terms of use) and that you would have to pursue that person for redress. I am not sure FB case would stand up in court but how many of us could take such action against FB - they would probably just bully us out of it with expensive lawyers spinning it out and frightening us with the potential costs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the exact wording of the license any user agrees to by accepting the TOU. "You grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, world wide license." Sounds like they can do anything they want with an image under those conditions, including resale. From what little experience I have in these matters there are no standardizations and any license can be crafted to fit a variety of situations, and of course FB is trying to cover all bases with this all encompassing wording. For me the only solution is to never again post anything on FB. Which is a shame, I have only a handful of friends and family on FB, and many enjoy the pics I have posted in the past. Most social websites over time fall by the wayside, and I can see a case where FB could branch off into stock sales, or wall art sales, and have  millions of images to sell with no revenue shared to the copyright holder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am with you, Kenny, no uploads especially stock-like images.

 

Use a link to the image on your own website or Alamy. So the file is not uploaded. If you do upload make it as tiny as possible and think about a visible watermark with your copyright notice and contact details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. "You grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, world wide license."

The uploader grants the licence. The photographer doesn't. So if a user uploads a photographer's image without his permission, he and FB answer to the photographer if FB infringe.

The point is that the uploader can't  sublicense without the photographer's permission.

The status of an Alamy image licensed for use including FB is interesting, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watermark all my images. 

 

But I think the real problem will occur when FB uses an image that someone has posted who didn't have the right to post it. Eg. infringed image from a news website, as mentioned by spacecadet. This could, if an American involved, quickly turn into a billon $ lawsuit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did some sleuthing today, and many, many sites have similar wording to FB. Even Wallgreens (corner pharmacy/drugstore) photo printing site has the uploader giving up the same type of royalty free license, though without the words 'transferable, sub-licensable and worldwide'. WTF. And of course it is all laid back on the uploader to make sure they own the copyright. So if my wife sends one of my images in for prints, my only recourse is to sue her!!!! What a crock of crap. Lawyers and legalese will be the downfall of America!!!!

Edited by Kenny J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     Here is where I am at, right now with all of this. The last year or so I have been trying to gear up for joining Alamy, and other sites where I can try to sell my work. I got better cameras and equipment, and have about 50 images of very high quality, both in terms of technical and aesthetics. At one time or another they have all been on FB, unknown to me that I was ceding them an RF license. Many of these I was planning on uploading to Alamy as RM. Now I am screwed. I need to talk with Alamy and find out what their take on all this is. In the meantime I see no sense in loading anymore images til this is sorted out. They may have to all be listed RF, which is NOT what I had in mind coming here a few weeks back. Anybody that has used an online service to get a print made for themselves, may have the same problems. S#$^%!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always backlink to my site if I post to FB. PixelRights is a great site for togs worried about theft. It's just near impossible for anyone to steal an image. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always backlink to my site if I post to FB. PixelRights is a great site for togs worried about theft. It's just near impossible for anyone to steal an image. 

Nice looking site, but PrtSc still works for an image which can be upsized 200% without getting too messy, the watermark is easily cloned out as well. Not trying to be negative but it is easy to do.

We might be best off promoting our pics all over FB, Twitter,Pinterest etc, then chasing people for retrospective licences, and making more on those licenses than we do on sales (recently admitted by a member, but not the promotion part of it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I always backlink to my site if I post to FB. PixelRights is a great site for togs worried about theft. It's just near impossible for anyone to steal an image. 

Nice looking site, but PrtSc still works for an image which can be upsized 200% without getting too messy, the watermark is easily cloned out as well. Not trying to be negative but it is easy to do.

We might be best off promoting our pics all over FB, Twitter,Pinterest etc, then chasing people for retrospective licences, and making more on those licenses than we do on sales (recently admitted by a member, but not the promotion part of it).

 

 

Not easily cloned out on my site. I have a no drag setting so people can't use the Microsoft Snipping tool to snap a pic off the site. You need to click on the box to see the pic. Drag away and it re-appears. 

 

http://www.campsie.photography/albums/SC8jx/hamilton-v-dundee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We might be best off promoting our pics all over FB, Twitter,Pinterest etc, then chasing people for retrospective licences, and making more on those licenses than we do on sales (recently admitted by a member, but not the promotion part of it).

 

Worth thinking about, but not an idea we should mention too often, lest defendants find out about it and start referring to it in court, and it starts to look deliberate.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

We might be best off promoting our pics all over FB, Twitter,Pinterest etc, then chasing people for retrospective licences, and making more on those licenses than we do on sales (recently admitted by a member, but not the promotion part of it).

 

Worth thinking about, but not an idea we should mention too often, lest defendants find out about it and start referring to it in court, and it starts to look deliberate.

 

 

As the person who made that comment I have considered this idea ... I want to be a photographer not a lawyer/debt collector though! It was mainly due to low sales and one big infringement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   My initial worry as someone very new to the whole licensing arena, was the conflict between FB RF license and images I want to or have already listed as RM with Alamy. I sent an e-mail off to Alamy about my concerns, and they didn't act like it was a big deal, especially since I have deleted all salable images from FB. Of course they more or less  threw it all back on me in the closing sentence that I am responsible for any conflicts arising. Everybody CTOA right on down the line. Ain't life grand, LOL. And I do say that with a huge smile on my face. My pockets are pretty shallow, so not really worried about the legal system coming after me. I obey all laws to the best of my understanding, and that is all anyone can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be noted that as soon as someone deliberately removes or clones out a watermark, they can be sued for damages under DMCA legislation and the image does not have to be registered with the US Copyright Office to obtain such damages.  The difficulty may be to get a US attorney to act!

 

I am not sure if Facebook would risk the wrath of its photographers or media if they were found to use an image which was uploaded by the owner of the image without the benefit of a license.  Hundreds of my images are on FB illegally and to give them credit, FB is quick to act on DMCA takedowns.  

 

Sheila 

Edited by Sheila Smart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.