Author Topic: Pinterest anyone? (Read 61171 times)

antistock · « **Reply #125 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:02 »

Quote from: michaeldb on May 25, 2012, 19:54

Please forgive me if that sounds to me like whistling in the dark. To paraphrase the Godfather, if history has taught us anything it is that rights once lost are difficult to get back. Especially if the usurpers have enough money to buy congressmen, judges, the even whole legislatures

copyright will never go away, the problem is for photography is quickly becoming unenforceable.

drugal · « **Reply #126 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:14 »

Quote from: Mantis on May 26, 2012, 08:17

Quote from: drugal on May 26, 2012, 03:59
Photoshop helps remove watermark. Thieves!!! Ps must be banned immediately!! Oh wait there are other software, multiple new ones will coming out!!! These thieves are lined up against poor microstockers!! They must be banned!! Ban sofware!! This software is based on math thievery to alter watermark pixels. Ban math!!! Mathematicians are crooks!!! They should pay taxes to microstockers for learning a watermark altering science!!! ...and all this software can downloaded from teh internets! By people!!! An army of thieves hunting for my $0.3 picures!! Let's ban teh internets and the people!!! : ))

I'm sorry but most of you people are a sad joke. Head in the sand & pi%*ing against the wind at the same time, a real circus act. While talking about law and rights, you also managed to call just about everybody using the net -except you of course- a thief. Just wait till they take notice of that and get a lawyer to shove it down your throat.... rightly so.

So lets recap:

1. Most of us are a sad joke - but not you
2. Most of us have our heads in the sand - but not you
3. Most of us are pissing against the wind at the same time - but not you
4. Most of us are a real circus act - but not you
5. You can't wait until we have a legal remedy shoved down our throats - but you are pure as the driven snow.

Since water seeks its own level, why are you even here? This seems to be your modus operandi in nearly every post you make. You are not constructive, everyone is always wrong and you are always right and you like to belittle members instead of constructively disagreeing with them and sharing a well crafted response. Immature is all I can say.

"everyone is always wrong and you are always right"

thats the pot calling the kettle black. you are not everyone. you are handfull of confused ppl... who think everyone else is wrong, while you'r pure... dude you just described yourself. There are at least 4 lengthy threads of useless whining showing exactly that attitude... Starting make yourselves look not just a fool, but more like crazy self-righteous cult libeling everybody else. Snap out of it.

bunhill · « **Reply #127 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:16 »

The issues that matter are around commercial use.

If you disrupt or try to kill Pinterest there will be an alternative Pinterest somewhere else. Because it is a strong idea with its own inevitable momentum. So what matters is how the agencies can become involved and to find ways of working with it - and making it work for them. That may very well be about better image tracking in some cases.

If millions of people like something and many of them are opinion and trend makers then the thing to do is to find ways of making it work or you.

ETA: it is a pity that this thread is getting trolled from both people who are for and against the thing. Somewhere in the middle is normally where the sensible conversation is normally taking place.

drugal · « **Reply #128 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:18 »

Quote from: antistock on May 26, 2012, 11:02

Quote from: michaeldb on May 25, 2012, 19:54
Please forgive me if that sounds to me like whistling in the dark. To paraphrase the Godfather, if history has taught us anything it is that rights once lost are difficult to get back. Especially if the usurpers have enough money to buy congressmen, judges, the even whole legislatures

copyright will never go away, the problem is for photography is quickly becoming unenforceable.

It's not the copyright. Since internet became commonplace there are several things with a pricepoint curving towards zero. This is one of them. Adopt or drop out.

cathyslife · « **Reply #129 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:21 »

Quote from: bhr on May 26, 2012, 11:16

The issues that matter are around commercial use.

If you disrupt or try to kill Pinterest there will be an alternative Pinterest somewhere else. Because it is a strong idea with its own inevitable momentum. So what matters is how the agencies can become involved and to find ways of working with it - and making it work for them. That may very well be about better image tracking in some cases.

If millions of people like something and many of them are opinion and trend makers then the thing to do is to find ways of making it work or you.

The agencies have already found a way to make it work for them. It works for them just fine as it is now, because they are concerned with bottom line profits and sales. Pinterest et. al. bring traffic to their site. That's what their intention is. They aren't interested in worrying about copyright. That's the contributor's problem. They do enough to cover their a$$ and the rest is our problem.

antistock · « **Reply #130 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:26 »

Quote from: michaeldb on May 25, 2012, 18:49

Quote from: stockastic on May 25, 2012, 16:05
"...when we say Pinterest is "hosting" we mean it makes illegal copies of copyrighted material, and then lets other people use those copies any way they want.
From Google on down, corporations are using the safe harbor provision of the DMCA as a license to steal. The more they weaken copyright, the more billions in profit they make. Google's business model is essentially that of a magazine. It provides access to the works of writers and artists and makes money by selling ads. Except that magazines pay the writers and artists.

Musicians, film-makers, authors (who sued Google for massive copyright infringement), and now artists and photographers seem to be fighting a losing battle against Google and the social media sites.

Copyright is being deprecated on the internet, and we are heading toward a world where - for the first time since the mid-1700s - people who create original works will not get paid for what they do.

Note though that Google and the other corporations which sactimoniously opposed SOPA are very quick to sue to protect their (questionable) software patents.

the google croocks deserve no more respect than a door-to-door toilet brush saleman.

what is depressing is watching megacorps like Universal and Viacom sueing these croocks and the lawsuit going on and on for many years and it seems they keep losing ground also as some judges openly agree on youtube and google freely stealing videos and photos !

now, if Viacom can't win this battle, who will ?? me ? you ?

antistock · « **Reply #131 on:** May 26, 2012, 11:51 »

Quote from: lisafx on May 25, 2012, 17:25

Yes, a different world where there is no financial benefit to any artistic endeavor. Seems like that world will be pretty barren of creative works. People will be too busy making a living in areas that do pay wages.

if you come in asia you will see that world.
here piracy is dominating any field where the product can be digitalized.

and products that can't be pirated will get copied anyway, statues, paintings, designs, t-shirts, clothes, concepts, ideas.

i've met many artists but they're all starving, unsurprisingly.
either they sell to the few local rich guys in town or they go for rich foreign tourists.

vietnam in particular might be the worst scenario i ever seen, with plenty of art galleries employing dozens of painters paid to repaint exact copies of famous western and asian artists, no space for anything else almost and i wonder if these guys would be ever able to paint something original from scratch !

one i asked a gallerist, "w-t-f is actually invented or created in vietnam ? you guys are now almost 90 millions, why i can't see a single vietnamese piece of art worth of being called original ? all i see are copycats of chinese and western artists, books are also a joke, clothes are made in china or outsourced by chinese companies as well, motos are all japanese Honda, movies are hollywood, chinese, japanese, korean, and zero from vietnam" ... and you see, as anybody else i asked the same question they laugh and they can't see where is the problem in all this, it's the most normal thing for them, they barely distringuish between original and copy and imitation ... if tomorrow everybody stop producing art they could care less, they would happily go on pirating and copying old stuff forever and listening 50-yrs odl songs over and over for the umpteenth time.

i mean look at their buddha temple, not to generalize but they're ALL the F.. same with minimal radical design differences, i've been in maybe 500 or more temples so far, we have 5-6 main architecture styles in east asia for religious temples, very nice by the way when done right, and yet, made photos in all of them, front view, side view, indoors, outdoors, golden buddha inside, some paintings, some carvings, monks, etc i'm so F... sick of seeing the same sh-it once again and ask the monks and they absolutely love it ! never heard a single complaint, never ! to made a new temple stand out from the crowd is unthinkable for them, they will happily built the same stuff even for the next 1000 yrs.

sorry to go a bit off topic but i can tell the skeptics that a world where art is not paid well or recognized as something worth its money is a world where art is merely a cheap product like it was fast food .. go in japan instead and you can literally stop at every step to see art on display and sold for crazy money !

michaeldb · « **Reply #132 on:** May 26, 2012, 15:53 »

I posted this question on DT: "If I submit here an image which includes the Pinterest logo, will DT reject it for IP infringement? If so, why are the IP rights of Ben Silbermann (owner of Pinterest) protected by DT and mine are not?"

Can I start a website and call it mikes-pinterest.com and use the Pinterest logo on it? If I do Ben Silbermann, will sue me to protect his Intellectual Property rights. Why are his Intellectual Property rights protected but he can infringe on mine?

It has been asked, what can we do about this? At least we can complain in every public venue that we have access to that it is wrong and unfair.

cathyslife · « **Reply #133 on:** May 26, 2012, 15:56 »

Good point. Maybe we should flood DT with images with pinterest logo and find out. Though I'm pretty sure of what the outcome will be.

drugal · « **Reply #134 on:** May 26, 2012, 16:02 »

Quote from: antistock on May 26, 2012, 11:51

Quote from: lisafx on May 25, 2012, 17:25
Yes, a different world where there is no financial benefit to any artistic endeavor. Seems like that world will be pretty barren of creative works. People will be too busy making a living in areas that do pay wages.

if you come in asia you will see that world.
here piracy is dominating any field where the product can be digitalized.

and products that can't be pirated will get copied anyway, statues, paintings, designs, t-shirts, clothes, concepts, ideas.

i've met many artists but they're all starving, unsurprisingly.
either they sell to the few local rich guys in town or they go for rich foreign tourists.

vietnam in particular might be the worst scenario i ever seen, with plenty of art galleries employing dozens of painters paid to repaint exact copies of famous western and asian artists, no space for anything else almost and i wonder if these guys would be ever able to paint something original from scratch !

one i asked a gallerist, "w-t-f is actually invented or created in vietnam ? you guys are now almost 90 millions, why i can't see a single vietnamese piece of art worth of being called original ? all i see are copycats of chinese and western artists, books are also a joke, clothes are made in china or outsourced by chinese companies as well, motos are all japanese Honda, movies are hollywood, chinese, japanese, korean, and zero from vietnam" ... and you see, as anybody else i asked the same question they laugh and they can't see where is the problem in all this, it's the most normal thing for them, they barely distringuish between original and copy and imitation ... if tomorrow everybody stop producing art they could care less, they would happily go on pirating and copying old stuff forever and listening 50-yrs odl songs over and over for the umpteenth time.

i mean look at their buddha temple, not to generalize but they're ALL the F.. same with minimal radical design differences, i've been in maybe 500 or more temples so far, we have 5-6 main architecture styles in east asia for religious temples, very nice by the way when done right, and yet, made photos in all of them, front view, side view, indoors, outdoors, golden buddha inside, some paintings, some carvings, monks, etc i'm so F... sick of seeing the same sh-it once again and ask the monks and they absolutely love it ! never heard a single complaint, never ! to made a new temple stand out from the crowd is unthinkable for them, they will happily built the same stuff even for the next 1000 yrs.

sorry to go a bit off topic but i can tell the skeptics that a world where art is not paid well or recognized as something worth its money is a world where art is merely a cheap product like it was fast food .. go in japan instead and you can literally stop at every step to see art on display and sold for crazy money !

what a racist slur.

michaeldb · « **Reply #135 on:** May 26, 2012, 16:19 »

Quote from: cclapper on May 26, 2012, 15:56

Good point. Maybe we should flood DT with images with pinterest logo and find out. Though I'm pretty sure of what the outcome will be.

"Pinterest might be the most illegal network to hit the Internet yet. More illegal than Napster. More illegal than Megaupload.
...Media law attorney Itai Maytal, who's an associate at Miller Korzenik Sommers LLP, 'In its terms of use, Pinterest actually specifies that users shouldn't pin photos they don't own the rights to, a request that is being ignored to an absurd degree. Even if you link and attribute, that does NOT absolve you of the fact that you took someone else's work and re-appropriated it.'"
Business Insider Kevin Lincoln|February 17, 2012
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-02-17/tech/31070312_1_copyright-holder-napster-youtube

Mantis · « **Reply #136 on:** May 26, 2012, 17:08 »

Quote from: drugal on May 26, 2012, 11:14

Quote from: Mantis on May 26, 2012, 08:17
Quote from: drugal on May 26, 2012, 03:59
Photoshop helps remove watermark. Thieves!!! Ps must be banned immediately!! Oh wait there are other software, multiple new ones will coming out!!! These thieves are lined up against poor microstockers!! They must be banned!! Ban sofware!! This software is based on math thievery to alter watermark pixels. Ban math!!! Mathematicians are crooks!!! They should pay taxes to microstockers for learning a watermark altering science!!! ...and all this software can downloaded from teh internets! By people!!! An army of thieves hunting for my $0.3 picures!! Let's ban teh internets and the people!!! : ))

I'm sorry but most of you people are a sad joke. Head in the sand & pi%*ing against the wind at the same time, a real circus act. While talking about law and rights, you also managed to call just about everybody using the net -except you of course- a thief. Just wait till they take notice of that and get a lawyer to shove it down your throat.... rightly so.

So lets recap:

1. Most of us are a sad joke - but not you
2. Most of us have our heads in the sand - but not you
3. Most of us are pissing against the wind at the same time - but not you
4. Most of us are a real circus act - but not you
5. You can't wait until we have a legal remedy shoved down our throats - but you are pure as the driven snow.

Since water seeks its own level, why are you even here? This seems to be your modus operandi in nearly every post you make. You are not constructive, everyone is always wrong and you are always right and you like to belittle members instead of constructively disagreeing with them and sharing a well crafted response. Immature is all I can say.

"everyone is always wrong and you are always right"

thats the pot calling the kettle black. you are not everyone. you are handfull of confused ppl... who think everyone else is wrong, while you'r pure... dude you just described yourself. There are at least 4 lengthy threads of useless whining showing exactly that attitude... Starting make yourselves look not just a fool, but more like crazy self-righteous cult libeling everybody else. Snap out of it.

If you don't like it leave. Your kind response says a lot about you, It's quite funny.

michaeldb · « **Reply #137 on:** May 26, 2012, 17:29 »

"20 B2B Marketers Losing their Brand on Pinterest" February 21, 2012
http://b2bdigital.net/2012/02/21/b2b-marketers-pinterest/
Some Pinterest pirates are hijacking the logos and brands of companies such as Sprint, FedEx, and Intel. Many of these Pinterest pages have pins linking to pages which are selling products on other sites. Because Pinterest is already making money from some referral fees, Pinterest may get profit from these pinboard pages in the future.

What will DT do if I start one of these pages under the name 'Dreamstime' and with Dreamstime's logo, and I pin whatever I choose on that page and find a way to monetize it for my own profit? I guess DT will just say, "Oh well, it's social media, they can do whatever they want."

grafix04 · « **Reply #138 on:** May 27, 2012, 01:25 »

Quote from: michaeldb on May 26, 2012, 17:29

"20 B2B Marketers Losing their Brand on Pinterest" February 21, 2012
http://b2bdigital.net/2012/02/21/b2b-marketers-pinterest/
Some Pinterest pirates are hijacking the logos and brands of companies such as Sprint, FedEx, and Intel. Many of these Pinterest pages have pins linking to pages which are selling products on other sites. Because Pinterest is already making money from some referral fees, Pinterest may get profit from these pinboard pages in the future.

What will DT do if I start one of these pages under the name 'Dreamstime' and with Dreamstime's logo, and I pin whatever I choose on that page and find a way to monetize it for my own profit? I guess DT will just say, "Oh well, it's social media, they can do whatever they want."

Here's what we can do to put our point across since they have trouble understanding how this is against the law. We should 'pin' the best selling images of the admin staff (not Serban's. I'm sure he doesn't care while he's getting his millions from DT). Then 're-pin' them on another board. Redirect the link to our sites/blogs and delete the first 'pin'. Then use the code to add those images to our sites/blogs. Maybe then it might sink in how wrong this is. Then during their next BS meeting, they might decide to remove the button.

ShadySue · « **Reply #139 on:** May 27, 2012, 07:54 »

I have not yet had a reply from iStock's CR about my image which has been pinned (and repinned) from (presumably) a legitimate buyer's site - so is unwatermarked. That's a whole week since I took out the ticket. Is that how long tickets are taking at the moment, or is my ticket in the 'ignore' pile?

Yuri_Arcurs · « **Reply #140 on:** May 27, 2012, 17:17 »

Noteworthy sign-up and social media strategy. Good design.
Total fail in providing good content. Completely crap and even duplicate content.
I need to study more because if they have become as successful as they have at this level, then there are things to learn.
Will spend some time now. Probably days/nights. Crap.

antistock · « **Reply #141 on:** May 27, 2012, 21:16 »

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on May 27, 2012, 17:17

Noteworthy sign-up and social media strategy. Good design.
Total fail in providing good content. Completely crap and even duplicate content.
I need to study more because if they have become as successful as they have at this level, then there are things to learn.
Will spend some time now. Probably days/nights. Crap.

the product is well done and carefully designed, but they spent millions to advertise it with several PR firms, SEOs, and paid marketing campaigns on the major US medias, so at the moment each of their users costed them a few dollars and they still have to make any profit.

if they plan to get rich with advertising let me say one thing, i have a few sites with my own photos and i always struggled to make people click on ads, tried every positions and combinations, but readers can barely look at both text ads and graphical ads as they're smaller than my photos and just a nuisance to watch, the best CTR i managed to reach was 0.2% ! (which is still a lot better than Facebook ads).

i guess their grand plan is therefore on "added value" services, like paying for unlimited storage space, unlimited pinning or whatever, and finally to sell Prints and merchandising, which is awfully illegal considering 99% of their images are pirated !

but they will get away with that, as lawsuits will take years to get anywhere, and if even Viacom and Universal can't manage to shut down youtube i can't see why Pinterest should make exception, these guys are already millionaires, and if someone will pay for the massaive theft it's gonna be the next fool who is buying Pinterest's shares on their IPO.

it's a thieves world !

traveler1116 · « **Reply #142 on:** May 27, 2012, 21:22 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 27, 2012, 07:54

I have not yet had a reply from iStock's CR about my image which has been pinned (and repinned) from (presumably) a legitimate buyer's site - so is unwatermarked. That's a whole week since I took out the ticket. Is that how long tickets are taking at the moment, or is my ticket in the 'ignore' pile?

If your image is on pinterest send a DMCA request to pinterest.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #143 on:** May 27, 2012, 21:43 »

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on May 27, 2012, 17:17

I need to study more because if they have become as successful as they have at this level, then there are things to learn.

To sum up, people like free stuff. End of story.

stormchaser · « **Reply #144 on:** May 28, 2012, 01:15 »

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on May 27, 2012, 17:17

Noteworthy sign-up and social media strategy. Good design.
Total fail in providing good content. Completely crap and even duplicate content.
I need to study more because if they have become as successful as they have at this level, then there are things to learn.
Will spend some time now. Probably days/nights. Crap.

It all depends on how you measure success. Right now, they are backed by approx $135 million in venture capital and claim to make no money. They are the social media darling whose popularity has been supercharged by the musings of blathering housewives living out their own virtual fantasies. Half of the women on there probably couldn't fit into the haute couture dresses they pin. If you are selling baby rattles, beauty creams and bacon snacks, there's money to be made by engaging there.

As sjlocke sums up, it's a freetard mentality at pinterest. If you have lithe blonde brides in your image inventory and especially pics of their Swarowski encrusted shoes, your images will be pinned. And no, hey won't come back to buy them. Let's be serious here. Any traffic would get would just be free-seeking just looking for more fodder. If you shoot the isolated orange over and over, consider yourself safe from the Pinhags.

ShadySue · « **Reply #145 on:** May 28, 2012, 02:16 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on May 27, 2012, 21:22

Quote from: ShadySue on May 27, 2012, 07:54
I have not yet had a reply from iStock's CR about my image which has been pinned (and repinned) from (presumably) a legitimate buyer's site - so is unwatermarked. That's a whole week since I took out the ticket. Is that how long tickets are taking at the moment, or is my ticket in the 'ignore' pile?
If your image is on pinterest send a DMCA request to pinterest.

iStock insist that we deal with misuses through CR. I always found doing it myself resulted in a quicker result, but they are adamant about it. I'm just not sure how long to give it. I was also hoping to get an official iStock line on pinterest, but of course, what we're likely to get is just whichever rep gets my email thinks about it - unless they get a lot, then they might make an 'official statement'.

sharpshot · « **Reply #146 on:** May 28, 2012, 02:33 »

antistock makes a good point. I was watching my favourite guitar player, Gary Moore, on YouTube yesterday. I might of bought the DVD but it's all on there. Lots of the video clips on YouTube must be breaking copyright laws but not many get removed and they are usually uploaded again by someone else. Until they do something or are made to do something to comply with the law, what chance do we have with sites like Pinterest. Doing DMCA requests will turn in to a full time job.

Is it too late to change the habits of billions of internet users? I would like to see a way for ISP's to collect a small fee when someone looks at something that has been uploaded illegally. Then that's passed on to the copyright holder. I know it's not likely to happen but it might be better than the constant flaunting of copyright laws until they're completely meaningless.

ShadySue · « **Reply #147 on:** May 28, 2012, 02:46 »

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on May 27, 2012, 17:17

Noteworthy sign-up and social media strategy. Good design.
Total fail in providing good content.

I disagree.
The content, being ONLY what the user wants, is utterly perfect, from the user's POV.
Looked at outside the copyright issues, it's the only social media that I've seen which could have any real value for the user.

antistock · « **Reply #148 on:** May 28, 2012, 03:51 »

Quote from: stormchaser on May 28, 2012, 01:15

If you are selling baby rattles, beauty creams and bacon snacks, there's money to be made by engaging there.

As sjlocke sums up, it's a freetard mentality at pinterest. If you have lithe blonde brides in your image inventory and especially pics of their Swarowski encrusted shoes, your images will be pinned. And no, hey won't come back to buy them. Let's be serious here. Any traffic would get would just be free-seeking just looking for more fodder. If you shoot the isolated orange over and over, consider yourself safe from the Pinhags.

at the moment we can't know if pinterest is made of junk-traffic or if instead it's made of high-spenders.

as far as i can tell, high spending girls already flood sites like Etsy and similar fashion-addict stuff buying rubbish, for anything else they may waste some more time on FB or Pinterest but i rest of the opinion that if some one wants to buy he goes straight to an e-commerce site rather than clicking ads for curiosity.

antistock · « **Reply #149 on:** May 28, 2012, 04:07 »

Quote from: sjlocke on May 27, 2012, 21:43

To sum up, people like free stuff. End of story.

yes and i can tell you that if we look back to the roots i remember AOL and Compuserve giving away CDs to get on the internet for free, with free email, and bla bla bla ... and yet nobody heard about this internet stuff, and nobody wanted it even for free, computers were still a geeky thing and whoever was chatting on a pc was seen as a nerd .. e-commerce was non existant, the only thing you could do was connecting at awfully slow speed and watch po-rn sites for free, chat on IRC, download warez via FTP, read some newsgroups, and guess what nobody even then was willing to pay half a dollar for that, everything was meant to be free, stolen, or pirated, besides no one would have trusted pay online by c/c.

then after many years of trial and error they managed to "monetize" the web, but sorry it's still mostly a free/pirate world !
and it's getting worse as it's just too easy to publish and copy and remix and clone and steal and throwing ads on a site and see what sticks.

maybe, i say maybe, the mass switch to mobile platforms will give birth to a sort of micro credit payment accepted worldwide but i'm skeptic about it, the operators are too fragmented, mobiles are also locked in many uncompatible garden walls, app stores, contracts, etc

iPhone users started paying well for commercial services, just to switch to free services soon after, and now to free games and free apps .. who is making money now on apps ? not many ... and it's become a cut-throat business where free apps will finally kill the market as they did for desktop software in many ways.

so now we already see free app-stores for android, and soon we will have free app-aggregators and search engines, reviews, and articles, a gigantic mess where once again i ask myself where is the money to be made ! ?

the point is ... a digital copy costs nothing to copy ... it's not a physical product ... these users are 99% leechers and scroungers, the REAL market of paying users is very very small .. maybe 1% of the total, maybe ... all this fuss about internet is absolutely overestimated when we look at the hard data, the few companies making serious profits are still the once selling real products or commercial services .. Amazon, Ebay, just to name a few, Google if we count advertising as a service (and it is) ..

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Pinterest anyone? (Read 61171 times)

antistock

drugal

bunhill

drugal

cathyslife

antistock

antistock

michaeldb

cathyslife

drugal

michaeldb

Mantis

michaeldb

grafix04

ShadySue

Yuri_Arcurs

antistock

traveler1116

Sean Locke Photography

stormchaser

ShadySue

sharpshot

ShadySue

antistock

antistock

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors