Author Topic: Google doesn't pay for artists' work? (Read 4789 times)

PaulieWalnuts · « **on:** June 23, 2009, 05:44 »

Interesting that Google made $1.42 in profits last quarter but they refuse to pay for artwork for their products.

Seems like it's okay for them to give everybody's else stuff away for free but not their advertising and other products.

I think I'll try some other search engines.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/business/media/15illo.html?_r=1

EDIT: Whoops. That's $1.42 Billion in profits.

Perry · « **Reply #1 on:** June 23, 2009, 05:53 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on June 23, 2009, 05:44

Google made $1.42 in profits last quarter

I made more!

qwerty · « **Reply #2 on:** June 23, 2009, 06:33 »

They could have just made it a "competition" and gave away a couple of drawing tablets and they would have been swamped with submissions.

Ringing people up to give their work away for free is abit over the top for me.

bittersweet · « **Reply #3 on:** June 23, 2009, 08:44 »

Quote

While some online publications, like Salon and Slate, hire illustrators, many rely on free or cheap stock illustrations, so illustrators are on tenterhooks about making a living online.

The fact that print publications are shrinking or folding also troubles illustrators.

“There’s a lot of concern that newspapers and all of print is becoming a bit of an endangered species,” said Brian Stauffer, an illustrator based in Miami whose work has appeared in publications including Rolling Stone, Esquire and Entertainment Weekly, and who also rejected Google’s offer. “When a company like Google comes out very publicly and expects that the market would just give them free artwork, it sets a very dangerous precedent.”

Google, though rebuffed by more than a dozen illustrators, said in its statement that it had plenty of takers.

“We don’t feel comfortable releasing the names of artists who are participating in the project before it launches,” stated the company, which also declined to give a date when artwork from the program would appear on Google Chrome. “However, we are currently working with dozens of artists who are excited about the opportunity to be involved in this project.”

Any takers that they rounded up some microstockers?

Phil · « **Reply #4 on:** June 24, 2009, 19:22 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on June 23, 2009, 05:44

Interesting that Google made $1.42 in profits last quarter but they refuse to pay for artwork for their products.

Seems like it's okay for them to give everybody's else stuff away for free but not their advertising and other products.

I think I'll try some other search engines.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/business/media/15illo.html?_r=1

I'm beginning to feel the same way. I read about a year or two ago that yahoo has never paid for a images either adn do pretty much the same thing. like the companies scouring flickr etc etc.

my wife is teacher, they always carry on about students copying buy they are worst industry I've seen (not that I've seen a lot) for copying stuff. this looks good straight on the photocopier. complain kids get info from internet but tell them to go to google images and flickr