pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Microsoft's new pinterest clone !!  (Read 12158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2012, 18:01 »
0
...
Un-watermarked stock images are stolen and should be reported but you can't blame Pinterest for that.
Well, yes, I can, because it's not really intended primarily as a place where you can pin your own images (though you can). That's not the point of the site. It's not purporting to be like Flickr and the like.
From their About page:
"Pinning 101
What is Pinterest?
Pinterest is a virtual pinboard. Pinterest allows you to organize and share all the beautiful things you find on the web. You can browse pinboards created by other people to discover new things and get inspiration from people who share your interests.
People use pinboards to plan their weddings, decorate their homes, and share their favorite recipes."

Actually, although I'm not a social media person, I can see that this is a very good idea (unlike eg FB or Twitter IMO). Sadly, I can also see that it infringes copyright, much of the time.


Noodles

« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2012, 18:30 »
0
...
Un-watermarked stock images are stolen and should be reported but you can't blame Pinterest for that.
Well, yes, I can, because it's not really intended primarily as a place where you can pin your own images (though you can). That's not the point of the site. It's not purporting to be like Flickr and the like.
From their About page:
"Pinning 101
What is Pinterest?
Pinterest is a virtual pinboard. Pinterest allows you to organize and share all the beautiful things you find on the web. You can browse pinboards created by other people to discover new things and get inspiration from people who share your interests.
People use pinboards to plan their weddings, decorate their homes, and share their favorite recipes."

Actually, although I'm not a social media person, I can see that this is a very good idea (unlike eg FB or Twitter IMO). Sadly, I can also see that it infringes copyright, much of the time.

I do not use FB or Twitter - I have tried both but they just didn't do it for me. How you use Pinterest is up to you. I'm not sure how well its monitored for copyright infringement. That is open for discussion but I have no issue with my (linked back to source) watermarked images being pinned on there by anyone - why should I?

ShadySue

« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2012, 18:45 »
0
...
Un-watermarked stock images are stolen and should be reported but you can't blame Pinterest for that.
Well, yes, I can, because it's not really intended primarily as a place where you can pin your own images (though you can). That's not the point of the site. It's not purporting to be like Flickr and the like.
From their About page:
"Pinning 101
What is Pinterest?
Pinterest is a virtual pinboard. Pinterest allows you to organize and share all the beautiful things you find on the web. You can browse pinboards created by other people to discover new things and get inspiration from people who share your interests.
People use pinboards to plan their weddings, decorate their homes, and share their favorite recipes."

Actually, although I'm not a social media person, I can see that this is a very good idea (unlike eg FB or Twitter IMO). Sadly, I can also see that it infringes copyright, much of the time.

I do not use FB or Twitter - I have tried both but they just didn't do it for me. How you use Pinterest is up to you. I'm not sure how well its monitored for copyright infringement. That is open for discussion but I have no issue with my (linked back to source) watermarked images being pinned on there by anyone - why should I?
As I and others have said, that's hardly the issue. The target market is women in the 20s and 30s. They suggest using it for "planning weddings, decorating homes and sharing recipes". How many of the target market using the site in the suggested ways are going to go to a stock site to find images? They're going to look at wedding dress sites, home decoration sites, recipe sites, or women's magazine sites, and that's where they may pick up 'your' (=someone's) unwatermarked pics, not linked back to the agency.
I don't actually use the site at all, but say 'I' was going to use it to 'pin' some hairstyles I wanted to show my stylist, so visited some magazine sites to research hairstyles, then I realise the copyright implications (most people would not give this a thought). How likely is it that 'I' (=most of the relatively few people who considered copyright) would then do a GIS to see if I could find the legitimate source of the image, then buy credits or pay money to license the image? If it was me, I'd just go earlier to the hairdresser and flick through the mags in her waiting area.

Noodles

« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2012, 19:11 »
0
As I and others have said, that's hardly the issue. The target market is women in the 20s and 30s. They suggest using it for "planning weddings, decorating homes and sharing recipes". How many of the target market using the site in the suggested ways are going to go to a stock site to find images? They're going to look at wedding dress sites, home decoration sites, recipe sites, or women's magazine sites, and that's where they may pick up 'your' (=someone's) unwatermarked pics, not linked back to the agency.
I don't actually use the site at all, but say 'I' was going to use it to 'pin' some hairstyles I wanted to show my stylist, so visited some magazine sites to research hairstyles, then I realise the copyright implications (most people would not give this a thought). How likely is it that 'I' (=most of the relatively few people who considered copyright) would then do a GIS to see if I could find the legitimate source of the image, then buy credits or pay money to license the image? If it was me, I'd just go earlier to the hairdresser and flick through the mags in her waiting area.

we are talking about a scrapbook on line not pirating stolen music or stock images - besides, there are a zillion blogs out there that do the exact same thing. Anyway, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one :)

« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2012, 19:19 »
0
I'm thinking of starting an antisocial network for people who hate the internet. Complete with a dislike button obviously.

Google Plus is for antisocial people that like the internet, is that close enough? :D

« Reply #30 on: May 21, 2012, 19:46 »
0
Ok I spent 30 seconds looking at Pinterest and I think I get it.  To some extent it seems like the early days of Napster - it's a blindingly easy way to share content that, legally speaking, you shouldn't be sharing.  Noodles is saying - what's the problem, if the images link back to your agency source?  The point is that if you create a Pinterest page for a purpose - showing a design concept, for example - and send people a link, and they look at it, comment, etc. - excuse me but you're now USING those images, whether or not they have visible watermarks. 

« Reply #31 on: May 21, 2012, 22:09 »
0
And (sigh) again, there is no requirement to link to the source.  And every image on Pinterest is free to use without credit however you like.

« Reply #32 on: May 21, 2012, 22:12 »
0
And with the embed feature, your image can end up on any website. 

If you file a DMCA notice the way Pinterest wants you to (pin page URL), they don't actually delete the image, only the page, meaning that your image can still be embedded in other websites AFTER a DMCA take down has occurred.

traveler1116

« Reply #33 on: May 21, 2012, 22:50 »
0
And with the embed feature, your image can end up on any website. 

If you file a DMCA notice the way Pinterest wants you to (pin page URL), they don't actually delete the image, only the page, meaning that your image can still be embedded in other websites AFTER a DMCA take down has occurred.

I filled out the DMCA notice and the image was taken down within a couple hours, surprisingly fast.  But having to fill out your name, address, email, and phone number to report it seems a bit much, I couldn't help but think that pinterest is collecting all this info from DMCA takedown requests and selling it to advertisers.  Maybe that's the business model?  The image pinterest had stored seems to have been removed along with the pinned content though.

« Reply #34 on: May 21, 2012, 22:53 »
0

I filled out the DMCA notice and the image was taken down within a couple hours, surprisingly fast.  But having to fill out your name, address, email, and phone number to report it seems a bit much, I couldn't help but think that pinterest is collecting all this info from DMCA takedown requests and selling it to advertisers.  Maybe that's the business model?  The image pinterest had stored seems to have been removed along with the pinned content though.

They remove the SINGLE REPORTED PAGE that calls the pinned image.  Unless they changed the way they operate, they don't remove the repins, nor do they remove the actual image from their servers.

All DMCA take down request require information to identify you in case your take-down notice is countered.

antistock

« Reply #35 on: May 22, 2012, 00:00 »
0
we are talking about a scrapbook on line not pirating stolen music or stock images - besides, there are a zillion blogs out there that do the exact same thing. Anyway, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one :)

the good news is that since the boom of FB and others, a ton of small blogs closed down or are now abandoned as people now seem to prefer bloggin on social networks.

on the other side, the theft keeps going on, just on another scale, eventually on private pages.
notice that FB even provides users with a couple easy "download" and "share" buttons for every image someone uploads... stealing has never been easier ! and you won't see any message about pesky copyright stuff, it's a steal and forget affair.

drugal

    This user is banned.
« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2012, 03:20 »
0

As I and others have said, that's hardly the issue. The target market is women in the 20s and 30s...


Ouch, you ppl are effed. Women of that age (or somewhat older too) are the cult sacred cows of western society. The prime consumers. Anything they do in mass is labeled cool and justified, and if you have anyhing against it you are a sycho jerk. They will change laws anytime for that crowd.

« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2012, 03:39 »
0
I filled out the DMCA notice and the image was taken down within a couple hours, surprisingly fast.  But having to fill out your name, address, email, and phone number to report it seems a bit much, I couldn't help but think that pinterest is collecting all this info from DMCA takedown requests and selling it to advertisers.  Maybe that's the business model?  The image pinterest had stored seems to have been removed along with the pinned content though.

All of the info is required by US copyright law.  It's not a marketing scheme.

« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2012, 15:55 »
0
It's beyond ironic that Microsoft, which makes huge efforts worldwide to prevent piracy of its products, is gung-ho to clone Pinterest.   DMCA takedown? Don't make me laugh.  Actually, it probably makes people at Pinterest laugh.

traveler1116

« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2012, 15:59 »
0
I filled out the DMCA notice and the image was taken down within a couple hours, surprisingly fast.  But having to fill out your name, address, email, and phone number to report it seems a bit much, I couldn't help but think that pinterest is collecting all this info from DMCA takedown requests and selling it to advertisers.  Maybe that's the business model?  The image pinterest had stored seems to have been removed along with the pinned content though.

All of the info is required by US copyright law.  It's not a marketing scheme.
I know it's required but is there anywhere that says they can't take that info and sell it?  I don't really trust Pinterest.

« Reply #40 on: May 22, 2012, 16:51 »
0
As I and others have said, that's hardly the issue. The target market is women in the 20s and 30s. They suggest using it for "planning weddings, decorating homes and sharing recipes". How many of the target market using the site in the suggested ways are going to go to a stock site to find images? They're going to look at wedding dress sites, home decoration sites, recipe sites, or women's magazine sites, and that's where they may pick up 'your' (=someone's) unwatermarked pics, not linked back to the agency.
I don't actually use the site at all, but say 'I' was going to use it to 'pin' some hairstyles I wanted to show my stylist, so visited some magazine sites to research hairstyles, then I realise the copyright implications (most people would not give this a thought). How likely is it that 'I' (=most of the relatively few people who considered copyright) would then do a GIS to see if I could find the legitimate source of the image, then buy credits or pay money to license the image? If it was me, I'd just go earlier to the hairdresser and flick through the mags in her waiting area.

we are talking about a scrapbook on line not pirating stolen music or stock images - besides, there are a zillion blogs out there that do the exact same thing. Anyway, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one :)

How is a "scrapbook on line" any different than a playlist online? Except of course, it consists of images rather than music.

If you replace the word "Pin" with "Grab" when speaking of the site features (because that is in effect what it does) you may see it from another perspective. To grab, with permission, a watermarked image image that links back to a microstock site is very different than to grab a licensed image from a blog -- even with the blogger's blessing. Perhaps the blogger holds a proper license, but the pinner/grabber does not.

If you are a photographer, and own a website, or have produced slideshows for customers, would you consider grabbing copyrighted music without proper license to use in the background? If your answer is "yes", you will likely never understand what we are concerned about here.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 16:56 by jbryson »

drugal

    This user is banned.
« Reply #41 on: May 22, 2012, 16:56 »
0
As I and others have said, that's hardly the issue. The target market is women in the 20s and 30s. They suggest using it for "planning weddings, decorating homes and sharing recipes". How many of the target market using the site in the suggested ways are going to go to a stock site to find images? They're going to look at wedding dress sites, home decoration sites, recipe sites, or women's magazine sites, and that's where they may pick up 'your' (=someone's) unwatermarked pics, not linked back to the agency.
I don't actually use the site at all, but say 'I' was going to use it to 'pin' some hairstyles I wanted to show my stylist, so visited some magazine sites to research hairstyles, then I realise the copyright implications (most people would not give this a thought). How likely is it that 'I' (=most of the relatively few people who considered copyright) would then do a GIS to see if I could find the legitimate source of the image, then buy credits or pay money to license the image? If it was me, I'd just go earlier to the hairdresser and flick through the mags in her waiting area.

we are talking about a scrapbook on line not pirating stolen music or stock images - besides, there are a zillion blogs out there that do the exact same thing. Anyway, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one :)

How is a "scrapbook on line" any different than a playlist online? Except of course, it consists of images rather than music.

If you replace the word "Pin" with "Grab" when speaking of the site features (because that is in effect what it does) you may see it from another perspective. To grab, with permission, a watermarked image image that links back to a microstock site is very different than to grab a licensed image from a blog -- even with the blogger's blessing. Perhaps the blogger holds a proper license, but the pinner/grabber does not.

If you are a photographer, and own a website, or have produced slideshows for customers, would you consider grabbing copyrighted music without proper license to use in the background? If your answer is "yes", you will likely never understand what we are concerned about here.

Whats your problem with a playlist online? grooveshark has been doing that for ages.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 17:18 by drugal »

« Reply #42 on: May 22, 2012, 16:58 »
0
I admit I could be wrong about this, but it was my impression that legitimate radio stations, on line or not, still had to pay royalties each time a song is played.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2012, 17:22 by jbryson »

Noodles

« Reply #43 on: May 22, 2012, 19:00 »
0
If you replace the word "Pin" with "Grab" when speaking of the site features (because that is in effect what it does) you may see it from another perspective. To grab, with permission, a watermarked image image that links back to a microstock site is very different than to grab a licensed image from a blog -- even with the blogger's blessing. Perhaps the blogger holds a proper license, but the pinner/grabber does not.

If you are a photographer, and own a website, or have produced slideshows for customers, would you consider grabbing copyrighted music without proper license to use in the background? If your answer is "yes", you will likely never understand what we are concerned about here.

Yes, the pinner/blogger example is a good one. But I just don't see the harm in allowing pinning. For example, my youngest daughter had to prepare a project for school, in the form of a small A3 poster, about dolphins. We used google to source some images (no doubt all copyrighted) and printed and glued them on to the poster. I highly doubt this is an uncommon practise. I guess its not legal to do so but if common sense prevails there is little harm done by it. This "politically correct" world we now seem to live in is awful sometimes.

ShadySue

« Reply #44 on: May 22, 2012, 19:29 »
0
If you replace the word "Pin" with "Grab" when speaking of the site features (because that is in effect what it does) you may see it from another perspective. To grab, with permission, a watermarked image image that links back to a microstock site is very different than to grab a licensed image from a blog -- even with the blogger's blessing. Perhaps the blogger holds a proper license, but the pinner/grabber does not.

If you are a photographer, and own a website, or have produced slideshows for customers, would you consider grabbing copyrighted music without proper license to use in the background? If your answer is "yes", you will likely never understand what we are concerned about here.

Yes, the pinner/blogger example is a good one. But I just don't see the harm in allowing pinning. For example, my youngest daughter had to prepare a project for school, in the form of a small A3 poster, about dolphins. We used google to source some images (no doubt all copyrighted) and printed and glued them on to the poster. I highly doubt this is an uncommon practise. I guess its not legal to do so but if common sense prevails there is little harm done by it. This "politically correct" world we now seem to live in is awful sometimes.

It's not particuarly the use you outline that's objectionable, though some would think it is.   Arguably, as it's a non-profit educational use by a pupil, it's fair use. (Here, it would be a discipinable offence for a teacher to require a child to pay to license an image for a project, but they do have Glow as a resource.)
However, it's giving image thieves somewhere (else) they can easily find and steal copyright images on a particular topic. (I haven't looked into the site. It may be you can prevent others seeing or pinning images on  your pinboard.

« Reply #45 on: May 22, 2012, 20:15 »
0
Whats your problem with a playlist online? grooveshark has been doing that for ages.

From Wikipedia: "As of January 2012, Grooveshark was being sued by EMI Music Publishing, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group and Universal Music."

grafix04

« Reply #46 on: May 22, 2012, 20:27 »
0

I filled out the DMCA notice and the image was taken down within a couple hours, surprisingly fast.  But having to fill out your name, address, email, and phone number to report it seems a bit much, I couldn't help but think that pinterest is collecting all this info from DMCA takedown requests and selling it to advertisers.  Maybe that's the business model?  The image pinterest had stored seems to have been removed along with the pinned content though.

They remove the SINGLE REPORTED PAGE that calls the pinned image.  Unless they changed the way they operate, they don't remove the repins, nor do they remove the actual image from their servers.

All DMCA take down request require information to identify you in case your take-down notice is countered.

They do remove the repins.  I'm not sure about the image from their servers though.  We'll have to test that.  Next DMCA I send, I'll take note of the image URL before sending it through. 

« Reply #47 on: May 22, 2012, 20:50 »
0
If you replace the word "Pin" with "Grab" when speaking of the site features (because that is in effect what it does) you may see it from another perspective. To grab, with permission, a watermarked image image that links back to a microstock site is very different than to grab a licensed image from a blog -- even with the blogger's blessing. Perhaps the blogger holds a proper license, but the pinner/grabber does not.

If you are a photographer, and own a website, or have produced slideshows for customers, would you consider grabbing copyrighted music without proper license to use in the background? If your answer is "yes", you will likely never understand what we are concerned about here.

Yes, the pinner/blogger example is a good one. But I just don't see the harm in allowing pinning. For example, my youngest daughter had to prepare a project for school, in the form of a small A3 poster, about dolphins. We used google to source some images (no doubt all copyrighted) and printed and glued them on to the poster. I highly doubt this is an uncommon practise. I guess its not legal to do so but if common sense prevails there is little harm done by it. This "politically correct" world we now seem to live in is awful sometimes.

You are correct, it is not an uncommon practice. And, there in lies one of the problems. Just because lots and lots of people steal hotel towels, doesn't mean it's okay for me to do it.

I think the true harm in your particular example is that your youngest daughter may not recognize in the future that it is not okay source and download just any image from Google. Many are copyrighted. Just like many articles and text also found by Google. If she doesn't know already, she will learn in school that it is not okay to copy and use those. Do you believe that a copyright held by a photographer is not equally valuable, or equally enforceable, to one held by an author?

If you make your living as a photographer, and as I'm relatively new here I don't know whether or not you do, I am worried that you do not understand the significance of the issue.

« Reply #48 on: May 22, 2012, 23:49 »
0
Maybe that's the business model? 

They claim to make no money, even though backed by some $135 million in venture capital.

On one of those business profile sites used by investors they are listed as a "mobile shopping service". I don't know where that definition came from. Was it the business site who possibly chose to list the profile that way or was it pinterest who made a submission of their profile that way? I don't know.

« Reply #49 on: May 23, 2012, 13:24 »
0
I dont like all that about Pinterest but in fact I see hundreds of actually stolen images on Facebook everyday. They are liked, shared, downloaded and used all the time. As someone mentioned stealing was never easier. And it will not become socially accepted - it is already widely socially accepted.   


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2352 Views
Last post June 06, 2007, 04:03
by stevemc
14 Replies
7511 Views
Last post June 14, 2008, 01:03
by Adeptris
10 Replies
2970 Views
Last post October 26, 2013, 21:21
by Uncle Pete
6 Replies
1802 Views
Last post November 10, 2014, 14:15
by rimglow
0 Replies
1119 Views
Last post February 27, 2018, 12:55
by Brightontl

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results