Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Polls
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
 Sponsors
 Special Offers
 Our Store
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Student Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
 Subscribe
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

"Why the Instagram Privacy Uproar Is Absurd"
Jim Colburn, Photographer
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 9:14 PM on 12.19.12
->> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/12/18/instagram_privacy_uproar...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 9:28 PM on 12.19.12
->> Jim, I don't consider it absurd.

Clearly, they are saying they can CHARGE advertisers to use your photos without any compensation to you. That's bull****!!! Is that not selling my work w/o my knowledge or permission?

It says: "you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you."

Sorry, I don't allow anyone, nor do I know anyone who agrees to let other people sell my work to others, or to use my work. That's what they are saying. I realize they will take my shots and use them for financial gain within the confines of Instagram, but there's nothing that PRECLUDES them from allowing that same advertiser to use the same images elsewhere. There's no language that says "exclusively for use in advertising on Instagram" or anything of the sort. It's clearly ambiguous at best, stealing at worst. How mind-numbingly stupid can they be?

I'm just real glad I don't use Instagram.

And there was a post here that asked what Brad thought of all this. I'm VERY interested in his reactions...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David A. Cantor, Photographer, Photo Editor
Toledo | OH | USA | Posted: 9:42 PM on 12.19.12
->> Here ya go Phil:

http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2012/12/instagram/
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael McNamara, Photographer, Photo Editor
Phoenix | AZ | USA | Posted: 10:22 PM on 12.19.12
->> From Casey Newton of Cnet: "Don't blame Instagram users -- blame Instagram. The tech press says users are at fault for this week's terms-of-service debacle. Ignore them."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57560116-93/dont-blame-instagram-users-bla.../
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Tim Huntington, Photographer
Monterey | CA | USA | Posted: 10:45 PM on 12.19.12
->> Phil,

Whilst I believe the Instagram debacle is of their own making with a poorly worded (or maybe cleverly worded and insidious) change to their ToS, if you truly believe your statement "Sorry, I don't allow anyone, nor do I know anyone who agrees to let other people sell my work to others, or to use my work." then you might want to get off Facebook as they already do that (currently to a limited degree).

If you as a FB user "like" a business page, let's say "Bob's Pizza". Then Bob decides to promote his page (ie, pays Facebook to advertize it for him), then Facebook will show some Bob's Pizza post on certain pages within the site (typically friends of folks who already "like" the page) and next to it will be your profile picture (ie - your work) along with a message that you like Bob's Pizza.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jim Colburn, Photographer
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 10:48 PM on 12.19.12
->> "Jim, I don't consider it absurd"

Phil, the subject header is a quote from the article's title, not a quote from me. The point that the article is trying to make, I believe, is that the absurdity lies in the fact that everyone's TOS already says the same thing as Instagram's and that users shouldn't complain if they don't read the fine print.

I don't use Instagram, never have.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Erik Markov, Photographer, Assistant
Indianapolis | IN | | Posted: 1:03 PM on 12.20.12
->> In and of itself..... I consider Instagram absurd.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
Dallas | TX | US | Posted: 1:42 PM on 12.20.12
->> "I don't use Instagram, never have."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmwqnqL3Hbg
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (3) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jim Colburn, Photographer
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 8:58 PM on 12.20.12
->> Not special G.J., just prescient.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Wesley R. Bush, Photographer
Murfreesboro | TN | U.S. | Posted: 8:47 AM on 12.21.12
->> "Spoiler alert: Instagram doesn't want to sell your photos because your photos suck."
- Grinch
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (3) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Brad Mangin, Photographer
Pleasanton | CA | USA | Posted: 12:08 AM on 12.22.12
->> Hi Phil. Since you are just dying to know:

"Thanks Instagram. I was really worried."
http://manginphotography.net/2012/12/thanks-instagram-i-was-really-worried/
 This post is:  Informative (5) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 10:54 AM on 12.22.12
->> Thanks Brad, great perspective.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Sutton, Photographer
Herndon | VA | USA | Posted: 11:12 AM on 12.22.12
->> Brad, I can't wait for you book if it's anything like the last one. Hey once I get it, can I mail both of them to you so you can sign them? Would really appreciate it..
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 11:59 PM on 12.23.12
->> The Instagram TOS sucked from the get-go. They still suck.
http://markloundy.tumblr.com/post/38435611503/what-the-heck-were-you-expect...

--Mark
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 12:32 PM on 12.24.12
->> Great analysis Mark...

No one begrudges them making money, that's not the point. Nor is the continuous "reassurance" that Instagram does not assume ownership of images. Mark's point about USAGE is spot-on. THIS is the issue. But... if you look at the current TOS reflected as of 8am Pacific time on 12/24/12, NOTHING HAS MATERIALLY CHANGED except the wording!!!!

To wit: "Some of the Instagram Services are supported by advertising revenue and may display advertisements and promotions, and you hereby agree that Instagram may place such advertising and promotions on the Instagram Services or on, about, or in conjunction with your Content. The manner, mode and extent of such advertising and promotions are subject to change without specific notice to you."
http://instagram.com/about/legal/terms/ see paragraph 2.

This is a carefully crafted change in the WORDING! They WILL continue to USE YOUR IMAGES IN ADVERTISING FOR WHICH THEY WILL CHARGE THE CLIENT! Ergo, based on the paragraph above, they WILL use your images for PAID advertising on Instagram! (And possibly elsewhere)

Read it, folks: "...Instagram may place such advertising and promotions on the Instagram Services or on, about, or in conjunction with your Content. The manner, mode and extent of such advertising and promotions are subject to change without specific notice to you."

Does anyone REALLY believe that they are selling advertising for free? Of course not, so the upshot is they are SELLING advertising and GETTING PAID using YOUR IMAGES! This freaking issue IS...NOT...RESOLVED! They have not backed down from a damned thing except the phraseology!!!!!!!!!!

Then there's this murky phrase: "Instagram owns and retains all rights in the Instagram Content and the Instagram Services."
http://instagram.com/about/legal/terms/ see paragraph 4. "...owns Instagram content..." !!??!!??

National Georgaphic is relieved... Brad is relieved... Everyone is breathing more easily because they THINK Instagram has "backed down" from their TOS. NOTHING HAS CHANGED! THEY HAVE NOT ALTERED THEIR INTENT TO USE YOUR IMAGES IN PAID ADS WITHOUT PERMISSION OR COMPENSATION TO YOU! And, throughout it all, there STILL is no specific verbiage that precludes them from allowing clients to use their ads elsewhere. So, if Ford Motor Company buys an ad from Instagram using your image in the ad, where does it prohibit Ford from using that ad in other advertising media?

"...advertising...in conjunction with YOUR CONTENT...without any notice to you"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The fox is giving everyone verbal reassurances that the chickens and eggs in the henhouse will not be harmed and everyone is saying "Whew, OK.." wtf!

????????????????
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Al Diaz, Photographer
Miami | Fl | USA | Posted: 2:16 PM on 12.24.12
->> Here is a take on Instagram's legal snafu from intellectual property law specialist Sam Lewis http://aldiazphoto.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-legal-lens-with-samuel-lewis-q....
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 6:25 PM on 12.24.12
->> "Instagram Hit With First Class Action Lawsuit After Furor Over Changes"

http://tinyurl.com/c6fzua8
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Phil Hawkins, Photographer
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 2:17 AM on 12.25.12
->> I was quoting the existing ToS before, but the new version to go into effect at January 19, 2013, has basically the same language I quoted above. Under "Rights" paragraph 2 & 3 at http://instagram.com/about/legal/terms/updated/
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of SportsShooter.com in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the SportsShooter.com website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: "Why the Instagram Privacy Uproar Is Absurd"
Thread Started By: Jim Colburn
Message:
Member Login:
Password:


|| Sponsor Special Deals

Free Shipping from Adorama
Available from: Adorama Camera | Price: $0.00
Notes: Free shipping on most orders!! Place your order directly with me, Jeff Snyder & I'll make sure that happens...Feel free to email me or call with any questions at any time too! jsnyder@adorama.com, or 800-223-2500 x2435 NOTE: AdoramaPix orders must be $20 or more for this offer
-- More Info --



Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
Who was Cal Ripken, Jr.'s personal photographer from 1992-95? Click here to see... ::..