• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Instagram might sell stored photos at will to advertisers!

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
_64691328_hi016678305.jpg


BBC News: Instagram was bought by Facebook in April 2012


"Facebook's photo-sharing site Instagram has updated its privacy policy giving it the right to sell users' photos to advertisers without notification. Unless users delete their Instagram accounts by a deadline of 16 January, they cannot opt out. The changes also mean Instagram can share information about its users with Facebook, its parent company, as well as other affiliates and advertisers. The move riled social media users, with one likening it to a "suicide note". The new policies follow Facebook's record $1bn (£616m; 758 euro) acquisition of Instagram in April." Read the entire story here.

This is not the first time folk offering free services switch the rules. Just make sure that pictures on Instagram are indeed what you don't mind giving to Facebook, the parent company, for it's own commercial use from now on. I'm not saying they are bad, just that we should be aware of the important changes.

Asher

BTW, OPF has always maintained the right to re-use submitted pictures but only within OPF for discussion and editorial comment, while both © and commercial rights remain with OPFrs, the photographers, as it should be! :)
 

Ben Rubinstein

pro member
This is a comment on that article.

"I love Instagram and I have over 1700 photos on it, they are small images and I would not post anything i'd not want the world seeing as my account is public. I would feel rather proud if they used any of my photos! If you don't like it then leave Instagram :)) Simple."

Says it all really..

Honestly no wonder the industry is dead. :-(
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...ays-it-now-has-the-right-to-sell-your-photos/
This is another article that spells it out.
Don
Facebook's new rights to sell Instagram users' photos come from two additions to its terms of use policy. One section deletes the current phrase "limited license" and, by inserting the words "transferable" and "sub-licensable," allows Facebook to license users' photos to any other organization.

A second section allows Facebook to charge money. It says that "a business or other entity may pay us to display your... photos... in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you." That language does not exist in the current terms of use.
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
This is a comment on that article.

"I love Instagram and I have over 1700 photos on it, they are small images and I would not post anything i'd not want the world seeing as my account is public. I would feel rather proud if they used any of my photos! If you don't like it then leave Instagram :)) Simple."

Says it all really..

What are the choices for photographers anyway? A photographer can:
-make the pictures he or she enjoys making and publish them on the internet, basically giving them away or
-make the pictures the market likes and sell them or
-not publish the pictures at all beyond their family circle.

The last choice is what happens when one leaves Instagram (or flickr, facebook, etc...): nobody makes money on your back, but nobody sees your pictures either. And you don't get one cent more.
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
FB now reserves the right to use your photos on their own site and looks like the new expansion of rights with only Instagram photos are being used as a trail balloon to see if FB can do the same with others.


Reginald Braithwaite, an author and software developer, posted a tongue-in-cheek "translation" of the new Instagram policy today: "You are not our customers, you are the cattle we drive to market and auction off to the highest bidder. Enjoy your feed and keep producing the milk."
:D
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
I have not been that interested in using Instagram and do not have a FB account. I am not a professional photographer so I have no need to use it to market services.
I think they got busted with that TOS though and I would not want them using my photos for free. It will be interesting to see the revised policy.
Don
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
Let us check on flickr - creative commons. At the time of this writing there are:
  • 37 555 820 photos free to use without any other restriction than attribution
  • 13 506 571 photos free to use commercially as long as they are not changed
  • 22 051 998 photos free to use commercially as long as the final product can also be shared under the same license

So that is about 73 millions pictures free to use commercially, including advertisements, etc... Where does the idea that instagram, facebook, etc... may make money with their users' pictures fit in a world where photographers willfully donated millions of pictures for the same use?
 
Top