Saffron_Blaze: Wonder how they are going to deal with Personality Rights and Model Releases. Flickr is essentially a re-user by selling these images and it is their responsibility to ensure consent is obtained where required. For the type of commercial use they are engaging in here they would normally need them. I guess they are hoping those identifiable people never find out they have been sold by Flickr.
That is true in the US for that specific case of street photgraphy but not sure it applies to what Flickr was doing. Besides not all those images they were selling were taken in a public place or even street photography
That information would apply well to images the users request to be in the program, such as through their Marketplace Stock Photo initiative. However, I was focusing on the Creative Commons images that Flickr is using without any further contact with the photographer. Moreover the CC licenses make it clear it is the re-user that is responsible for all clearances and releases.
Wonder how they are going to deal with Personality Rights and Model Releases. Flickr is essentially a re-user by selling these images and it is their responsibility to ensure consent is obtained where required. For the type of commercial use they are engaging in here they would normally need them. I guess they are hoping those identifiable people never find out they have been sold by Flickr.
Saffron_Blaze: The winner highlights that fact that there is little truly wild in England. Excepting London, it is one giant farm.
Indeed, we had a fox living in our backyard along with the hedgehogs and wood pigeons. Mind none of them were particularly wild.
Clive, I have my tongue in my cheek. I lived in England the past three years. I know what is there and what isn't. Growing up in Canada has skewed my perspective for sure but there is no doubt there is an order of magnitude difference as to what is wild in England and what is wild in many other parts of the world. Cheers.
What you call a forest is a mere city park in Canada. The Royal Forest Of Dean... don't blink or you will miss it. The New Forest... a bit of wasteland with ponies running around. Even the few large Moors are suspect. Wales and Scotland may claim to wildlife but England? You need wilderness to truly have wildlife.
The winner highlights that fact that there is little truly wild in England. Excepting London, it is one giant farm.
I like how Nikon waited to release the advisory until the bulk of the early adopters had their refund/exchange privileges expire.
I will just see about returning it to henry's canada. I am not shipping my camera off for who knows how many times.
Once you get past the unanswered question of copyright there is the realm of moral correctness. The photographer could have never published that work, as would have been his right. If only he had the capacity to publish that photo, then there is some sense of ownership. To then steal away that ownership is morally bankrupt.
Must be one of those temporary workers they keep talking about in the media.
"Changes are significant" only equals a "little bit better"?
Look at all the internet geniuses that magically gather here for this post.
Better stuff finds its way at the bottom of Flickr's Explore everyday. Much better.
Affordable excellence. Hard to complain about that.
Killing in God's name. How civilised.
The only people who are likely to be disappointed by this are those who were hoping Flickr was a way in the door. Those in the door don't seem to be complaining. The Flickr/Getty interface was convenient but often quite irritating.
Getty intends to share the ad revenue with those whose images get embedded. They have a similar program for commercial users called Connect. Initially with the Connect program, Getty rounded down figures while placing the threshold for renumeration at 1 cent, which required thousands of views to achieve. Moreover they made the threshold specific to an image not collective for all images of a photgrapher. It doesn't take a genius to fgure out what the outcome was. Getty was always collecting revenue on the collective use of all images across their library while not being obligated to pay the indiovidual photgraphers due to the rounding down, per image and threshold requirements. The scheme was eventually amended to be more fair to the photgrapher; however even those with sizeable portfolios are only reporting revenue in the pennies per month range from Connect.
I guess 500px thinks it can rival Getty.