|
On December 18 2012 19:05 Beavo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2012 18:38 Solarist wrote:On December 18 2012 18:28 Beavo wrote: So don't use their service anymore if you don't like their policies. Whats the big deal? How else are my friends supposed to know what im eating presented in sepia tone?!!?!?!?!?! Oh Shit! Never thought of that. Raise hell instead!
Hipsters everywhere will starve to death. Whats the point of eating if my friends cant see how ironically im able to ingest sushi
|
On December 18 2012 20:01 JKM wrote: So they're going to sell people's private pictures of restaurant food? Let's make a big deal out of this! If someone is going to use your pictures for commercial purposes you don't want to be compensated for it? You also have no control over in what kind of setting they'll end up in.
|
Would I have to end up paying to use my own pictures taken on instagram?
|
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
|
On December 18 2012 20:01 JKM wrote: So they're going to sell people's private pictures of restaurant food? Let's make a big deal out of this!
No let's belittle it completely and act as though there aren't any personal pictures on there, that'd be funny.
|
On December 18 2012 20:16 bardtown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2012 20:01 JKM wrote: So they're going to sell people's private pictures of restaurant food? Let's make a big deal out of this! No let's belittle it completely and act as though there aren't any personal pictures on there, that'd be funny.
I never understand why there are so many apologists for big businesses. This really is screwing over the users of this service imo.
My wife takes pictures for stock photography, and they can use these photos for literally anything, STD warnings ads, any weird commercial you can think of.
Obviously the solution is to simply close your accounts if you don't want your stuff shared and let others know so they can make an informed choice!
|
On December 18 2012 20:12 disciple wrote: I guess that was expected since Instagram wasnt presenting a direct revenue source for Facebook and fb needs to monetarize more to please shareholders
Worst case scenario is that investors see this as a threat to the Facebook brand and they lose money than they would by just writing Instagram down as a loss.
|
Isn't this the same thing Facebook is already doing with the images on their site?
I don't mind either way, I don't really use instagram since I think it's the strongest indication of a poor photographer.
|
Those anti class action lawsuits don't actually mean anything. I mean they can actually require you to agree that they're the Hyper-President of Mars but it means the exact same as an anti class action lawsuit clause.
|
What will they do with all those food pics :O
|
... I hate to do this. I really really do. But think about it this way. (Which is why it is written in this fashion, similarly to how photobucket and deviantart policies read, if you actually read them. This one does seem particularly wide, of course.)
Instagram is a commercial service. It produces a web page with your pictures on it. A third party may pay them show advertising on the page alongside your pictures. It may have to move the physical storage associated with your pictures, or pay a third party to take over the hosting and web serving of those pictures, to lighten the load on its servers.
It's possible these changes are more related to their business model, or physical infrastructure, than to any plan to sell pictures to random groups.
Not sure how it will play out, though. They may actually be looking for more revenue. I dunno. But then again, I never used Instagram because my life simply is not that exciting, nor do I have any desire to share pictures that way.
|
On December 18 2012 20:38 felisconcolori wrote: ... I hate to do this. I really really do. But think about it this way. (Which is why it is written in this fashion, similarly to how photobucket and deviantart policies read, if you actually read them. This one does seem particularly wide, of course.)
Instagram is a commercial service. It produces a web page with your pictures on it. A third party may pay them show advertising on the page alongside your pictures. It may have to move the physical storage associated with your pictures, or pay a third party to take over the hosting and web serving of those pictures, to lighten the load on its servers.
It's possible these changes are more related to their business model, or physical infrastructure, than to any plan to sell pictures to random groups.
Not sure how it will play out, though. They may actually be looking for more revenue. I dunno. But then again, I never used Instagram because my life simply is not that exciting, nor do I have any desire to share pictures that way. It may start as advertising, but everyone gets money hungry. It will quickly turn into something more than just money raising to support themselves (not like they need it for ad revenue anyway, as it is owned by Facebook)
|
If you ask me, they should go out of business. Why should we care that they don't make money out of this ? If the way they want to make money is by getting money from other people's work/passion...?
I'm not sure about Valve's business model ( about % of earning taken from workshop stuff ), but that is the right way to make money. They get more people creating, while giving them insentive to do more cool stuff, while both them and the artist get money.
Such a move won't encourage competition..
|
On December 18 2012 20:31 Probe1 wrote: Those anti class action lawsuits don't actually mean anything. I mean they can actually require you to agree that they're the Hyper-President of Mars but it means the exact same as an anti class action lawsuit clause. Yeah it won't stand under most legal systems, you usually can't opt out of the law. Personally as an amature sports photographer, I hate everything about instagram anyway. Facebook already claims ownership of photos you put on there, I imagine any attempt to sell or publish your images, especially private ones would violate other privacy clauses/laws. Facebook is a funny one, in a similar vein to Apple they're a very dodgy company that want's to control its uers, but people like their product so don't want to believe it.
|
hrm, this is why I hate "social networking" Facebook has been doing this for years.
And fyi, there is no real debate here, they have the right to what they like with your photos. If you clicked accept...
|
Ok, well this is very creepy
|
i've never used instagram so i don't really get all the hype around it, maybe just use photoshop instead and apply some filters for effects o_o?
|
I hope this will mark the end of one of the most cancerous applications ever to be developed.
|
On December 18 2012 22:09 Swwww wrote: I hope this will mark the end of one of the most cancerous applications ever to be developed. "i have no use for it, but because its popular it means its cancer, even thou it has never harmed me in any way"
|
On December 18 2012 22:12 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2012 22:09 Swwww wrote: I hope this will mark the end of one of the most cancerous applications ever to be developed. "i have no use for it, but because its popular it means its cancer, even thou it has never harmed me in any way"
I know people who use it, worst thing about it is that every single picture that they have taken they do you not have the original and have some retard filter applied to it AND its in some stupid format. I don't see how anyone can call a facilitator of the fucking SWAG generation anything other than cancerous. Though, since everyone who uses it is already a retard I guess they wont care about having their personal info stolen.
|
|
|
|