On 12/19/2012 10:59 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> Secondly, to extend from that carte-blanche to Instagram becoming a kind of
>> photo stock agency is plain bananas...
> Yet, the revision to terms was just that.
Legal terms and reality are often unrelated. Are there people who will be happy
to use images off Instagram, or any web
display, no matter how poor quality? Absolutely.
Are they any more likely to pay Instagram for the images they cop off the
screen than any other site? Absolutely not.
I think Piers has it right. They need permission to use your images to pull in
eyeballs to also be exposed to the
adjacent ads. The idea that there's enough money in selling these images as
stock to make it worth their time seems
silly to me.
Just because they claim the right to do so doesn't mean they will.
I suppose my deeper question is why anybody on this list would post images on
such a service - and if so, why they would
care what happens to them after they have been mangled.
Absurdist Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|