Author Topic: Google giving photos away free for commercial use and iStock agrees (Read 258983 times)

Phil · « **Reply #1100 on:** January 25, 2013, 07:56 »

Is there anywhere that google says what you can and cant do with the images 'beyond just personal and commercial use'?

ShadySue · « **Reply #1101 on:** January 25, 2013, 08:06 »

Quote from: Phil on January 25, 2013, 07:56

Is there anywhere that google says what you can and cant do with the images 'beyond just personal and commercial use'?

Apparently not for general consumption, though it's been requested several times in Sean's thread over there. I guess if you used GoogleDrive, you'd have to be able to see the T&C. If not, even their suggestion that people can only use them within GD is even more farcical than it seems at first sight.
Someone suggested on the iStock thread that if someone sent Google a DMCA, they would surely get the EULA in reply.

Phil · « **Reply #1102 on:** January 25, 2013, 08:57 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 25, 2013, 08:06

Quote from: Phil on January 25, 2013, 07:56
Is there anywhere that google says what you can and cant do with the images 'beyond just personal and commercial use'?
Apparently not for general consumption, though it's been requested several times in Sean's thread over there. I guess if you used GoogleDrive, you'd have to be able to see the T&C. If not, even their suggestion that people can only use them within GD is even more farcical than it seems at first sight.
Someone suggested on the iStock thread that if someone sent Google a DMCA, they would surely get the EULA in reply.

I've been looking for it within google docs etc, all I can find is the general use of images (the just because you found doesnt mean you can use it) and googles overall eula for all their products, software (inc google drive) etc, nothing in that comes close.
From what I can see at this point google just say personal and commercial use with no specification including that they have to be used in google docs - it appears that I could grab them, put them on my site and resell them, just like you can with public domain etc (obviously not resell in the micros though because of copyright holder).

Ploink · « **Reply #1103 on:** January 25, 2013, 08:58 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 25, 2013, 07:51

It seems to me that you stated something that many of us were thinking and did so in a polite way. It is also something that has been said on that thread a lot of times already. How random that you should have got banned for it. I wonder how many other people have had post deleted and been banned behind the scenes during the discussion.

It seems he (Lobo) had a bad day, today. This is from the "Way we communicate"-thread:

---
You all want communication but you shoot just about every one we have come in here. I don't reckon you only want to see me in here all the time as I tend to get testy and take was less guff than the rest of the admins. However, how about all you folks who seem to have all the snappy nasty remarks park your mouse button for a spell. My limit has been reached so either tone it down or get a helmet because I'm going to start raining hammers down on those of you who should know better.

You're mad. You want results. We are working towards making changes in how things are handled in here but it's going to take some effort on the part of the contributors as well. If you don't have something constructive or civil to say you and I will get to know each other real soon.

Matthewleedixon: if you have a chance take a look through the numerous threads we have rolling on an array of pertinent issues. In the morning I'll even link up a bunch of stuff for you, but it's late here and I have 2% battery life so I hope you'll forgive me.

This will be the last post. You won't gt a chance to respond in here. Feel free to send me a sitemail if you want to tell me what's what.
---

See here: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350245&page=6

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #1104 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:10 »

Then he apologised for that post and said he needed a time-out, which is probably a first (though I suppose leaving it up acts as a sort of veiled warnign)

ShadySue · « **Reply #1105 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:14 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 25, 2013, 09:10

Then he apologised for that post and said he needed a time-out,

A permanent one would be good.
But I imagine the only reason he's come back in his normal persona is that he's had a further guarantee over his apparently teflon-coated, cast-iron contract - apparently the only one to be in a lesser's favour (meaning all of us lessers: contributors, employees ...).

Microbius · « **Reply #1106 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:16 »

He really needs to quit his job while he still has his sanity. He's in a terrible position trying to justify the unjustifiable and stamp down on people who are being scr*ed over. It is clearly extremely stressful and it is making him bitter and angry (and unprofessional).

Whatever they are paying him it's not worth the stress.

Ploink · « **Reply #1107 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:19 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 25, 2013, 09:10

Then he apologised for that post and said he needed a time-out, which is probably a first (though I suppose leaving it up acts as a sort of veiled warnign)

Yes, he did, and I can understand why he is angry and frustrated, he probably gets a lot of pressure from contributors and the TPTB. I'm actually surprised how long they let some threads run, IMO there has been a major policy change on what is permissible in the forums long before the RR post...

ShadySue · « **Reply #1108 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:39 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 25, 2013, 09:16

He really needs to quit his job while he still has his sanity. He's in a terrible position trying to justify the unjustifiable and stamp down on people who are being scr*ed over. It is clearly extremely stressful and it is making him bitter and angry (and unprofessional).

If he remotely cared about having to 'justify the unacceptable', he'd have left at the time of the RCs, especially when, having encouraged people to diversiry into different media, they then shafted them hard for doing so. I'm not in that group, but no matter whether one thinks the RC system is 'fairer' (despite not being what we'd been promised), the multimedia people were well and truly sold up the river with no possible justification. They even had to be persuaded ex post facto to allow independence/exclusivity over the different media.
Anyone with the slightest human sensitivity would have quit then, or at least would have stopped adding insult to injury.
He's not a contributor; he clearly doesn't care a d*mn about us, without whom he'd have no job.

sdeva · « **Reply #1109 on:** January 25, 2013, 09:55 »

Things are hotting up all around and there's a week to go for 02 Feb. My fingers are itching to reach for that deactivate button already to take down a chunk of my port. With 3 clicks per image x 300 images that I plan, it will be a busy day since I couldn't figure out the short way to do it.

Poncke · « **Reply #1110 on:** January 25, 2013, 10:04 »

Quote from: sdeva on January 25, 2013, 09:55

Things are hotting up all around and there's a week to go for 02 Feb. My fingers are itching to reach for that deactivate button already to take down a chunk of my port. With 3 clicks per image x 300 images that I plan, it will be a busy day since I couldn't figure out the short way to do it.

Use Sean's script, I am sure some one can dig up a link. I am at work now.

Maybe start a new sticky with Sean's script, Leaf?

Blammo · « **Reply #1111 on:** January 25, 2013, 10:15 »

Sean Locke's Greasemonkey script.

Here's a link to Tyler's post explaining it:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-on-istock-feb-2/msg291150/#msg291150

And here's the direct link:
http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js

dhanford · « **Reply #1112 on:** January 25, 2013, 10:30 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 25, 2013, 09:16

He really needs to quit his job while he still has his sanity. He's in a terrible position trying to justify the unjustifiable and stamp down on people who are being scr*ed over. It is clearly extremely stressful and it is making him bitter and angry (and unprofessional).

Whatever they are paying him it's not worth the stress.

I always thought that there was a few folks who take turns being Lobo. This way he can stay snarky and not get burnt out. Also, competing Lobo's comparing notes and competing to "out Lobo", Lobo boosts comradery amongst the Lobos!

fotografer · « **Reply #1113 on:** January 25, 2013, 11:44 »

It's like the school bully has been made head boy or head prefect!!!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #1114 on:** January 25, 2013, 12:44 »

I think this is similar to the WIX integration, but via a tweet I happened upon, the project sharing/management platform Kona has announced it now has Google Drive integration

I realize that Getty/iStock are arguing that this isn't really a new platform as it's just accessing work on Google Drive, but as things move around in these platforms - to other users or displayed on the web - what originated in a Google Drive doc is going to end up many other places.

jbryson · « **Reply #1115 on:** January 25, 2013, 12:50 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 25, 2013, 12:44

I think this is similar to the WIX integration, but via a tweet I happened upon, the project sharing/management platform Kona has announced it now has Google Drive integration

I realize that Getty/iStock are arguing that this isn't really a new platform as it's just accessing work on Google Drive, but as things move around in these platforms - to other users or displayed on the web - what originated in a Google Drive doc is going to end up many other places.

Yes it is. And that is the clincher for me.

aspp · « **Reply #1116 on:** January 25, 2013, 12:52 »

Quote from: fotografer on January 25, 2013, 11:44

It's like the school bully has been made head boy or head prefect!!!

It's not Hogwarts.

Would that it were.

flotsom · « **Reply #1117 on:** January 25, 2013, 12:54 »

Tis the clincher for me too, being banned from the istock forum was one thing, but this shows that things will only get worse, far worse as more and more sites start using the google docs api. Off to start deactivating.

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #1118 on:** January 25, 2013, 13:28 »

Quote from: Kenny on January 22, 2013, 15:28

New page added that lists the amount of money distributed to the agency and the artist/agency commissions.

http://kga.me/gds/details/getty-images

Not anymore, all the site's pages now direct to this http://kga.me/dmca-20120124.html

edit: I can't keep up with how much is being written on msg these days. Just realised this has already been mentioned.

sdeva · « **Reply #1119 on:** January 25, 2013, 18:08 »

Quote from: Blammo on January 25, 2013, 10:15

Sean Locke's Greasemonkey script.

Here's a link to Tyler's post explaining it:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/d-day-%28deactivation-day%29-on-istock-feb-2/msg291150/#msg291150

And here's the direct link:
http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js

Ok thanks v much, will try it

HughStoneIan · « **Reply #1120 on:** January 26, 2013, 03:08 »

leaf · « **Reply #1121 on:** January 26, 2013, 03:20 »

I removed one post whose only purpose was insulting lobo. Take it easy on the personal attacks (this goes for iStock admins as well)

klsbear · « **Reply #1122 on:** January 26, 2013, 11:44 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 25, 2013, 12:44

I think this is similar to the WIX integration, but via a tweet I happened upon, the project sharing/management platform Kona has announced it now has Google Drive integration

I realize that Getty/iStock are arguing that this isn't really a new platform as it's just accessing work on Google Drive, but as things move around in these platforms - to other users or displayed on the web - what originated in a Google Drive doc is going to end up many other places.

And the paragraph starts out "file sharing just got better"... another way of furthering the six degrees of separation. Supposedly the Google Drive document creator is agreeing to some unknown terms when they create the document but what terms are regulating anyone that document is shared with?

EmberMike · « **Reply #1123 on:** January 26, 2013, 14:07 »

I just came across this article from May 2011 about the Getty issue with forcing photographers into the subscription program against their will and preventing them from blocking their RM work going into an RF collection. The APA commented on the issue like this:

Quote

As the creator and owner of the intellectual property, the photographer has the inherent right to determine how an image is to be licensed, including whether an image should be maintained as an RM or RF image. Getty Images’ effort to leverage its position in the industry to undermine that fundamental right and force its contributors to relinquish control over the manner in which their creative works are licensed is completely improper.

I feel like we're coming back around to the same old issues with Getty, over and over again. For the independents it was the forced inclusion in ThinkStock. Now we've got across the board forced inclusion in these redistribution deals. This is the new normal for Getty. Or it has been the new normal for a while now. The deal these days is that if you want to sign on with any Getty-owned company, you have to waive your rights to any say in where your images end up.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #1124 on:** January 26, 2013, 14:41 »

Quote from: EmberMike on January 26, 2013, 14:07

I just came across this article from May 2011 about the Getty issue with forcing photographers into the subscription program against their will and preventing them from blocking their RM work going into an RF collection. The APA commented on the issue like this:

Quote
As the creator and owner of the intellectual property, the photographer has the inherent right to determine how an image is to be licensed, including whether an image should be maintained as an RM or RF image. Getty Images’ effort to leverage its position in the industry to undermine that fundamental right and force its contributors to relinquish control over the manner in which their creative works are licensed is completely improper.

I feel like we're coming back around to the same old issues with Getty, over and over again. For the independents it was the forced inclusion in ThinkStock. Now we've got across the board forced inclusion in these redistribution deals. This is the new normal for Getty. Or it has been the new normal for a while now. The deal these days is that if you want to sign on with any Getty-owned company, you have to waive your rights to any say in where your images end up.

In retro its been like that for years, long before micro, just that we notice it more nowdays, ppl are a bit more on the ball. The very second you sign a contract, youre in their hands.
Dont you think Getty long ago confirmed all this with their incredible battery of lawyers. Ofcourse they did.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Google giving photos away free for commercial use and iStock agrees (Read 258983 times)

Phil

ShadySue

Phil

Ploink

BaldricksTrousers

ShadySue

Microbius

Ploink

ShadySue

sdeva

Poncke

Blammo

dhanford

fotografer

Jo Ann Snover

jbryson

aspp

flotsom

Microstock Posts

sdeva

HughStoneIan

leaf

klsbear

EmberMike

ClaridgeJ

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors