Attention: These forums are no longer active. The iStock Contributor forums have moved to the Contributor Community site.

Exclusives, delete your Instagram! - Or don't.

First pagePrevious pageof 6Next page
Displaying 21 to 40 of 104 matches.
Westbury
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:09AM
Btw it is still possible to use the Instagram app without uploading anything to Instagram i.e. just save to camera roll, so I wouldn't panic.
cbarnesphotography
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:17AM
Saw this on the news this morning.
Andyd
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:18AM
Do they not think before they do things like this, unbelievable!
huePhotography
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:22AM
I'll wait. But I'm not going to loose much they do. I have only a couple photos up there. I generally use Hipstamatic for my cell phone images, and post to facebook. Though with the new Facebook terms I'm not sure how much of that I will contunie to do.


What is up with these companies trying to sell your photos?


Something just accurred to me. Does Facebooks terms violate our exclusive agreement? The terms say that Facebook has "non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license".

(Edited on 2012-12-18 07:36:51 by flugga)
jaminwell
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:29AM

I am not familiar with that Instagram nonsense (just reviewing info on it now) but apparently all such images must be uploaded and stored on their (free) site. That is why they can just grab your pic and sell it. So can't Apple claim a stake as well with images actually shot on their products (iphone, ipad etc) or HTC for that matter. Where is the limit? where is the line drawn? 


 
zodebala
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 1,249 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:31AM
Posted By sjlocke:


Posted By alvarez:
I'm doing so immediately! Thanks for the post! This is simply unacceptable, regardless whether Im a photographer or not!



I'm going to wait a bit, they can't really expect this to fly. We'll see.


Me too. So the new rules will breach the exclusive agreement? 


HQ has anything to say?
swilmor
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:31AM
Posted By Westbury:
Btw it is still possible to use the Instagram app without uploading anything to Instagram i.e. just save to camera roll, so I wouldn't panic.


I´ve always automatically saved all my instagram images to my camera roll anyways and most of my iphone shots are not taken or edited with instagram so I won´t lose much in deleting my account. It was just a convenient way to share my photos but there are other ways to do that, so no great loss.


ETA: typo

(Edited on 2012-12-18 07:32:12 by swilmor)
Sirimo
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerThis user has the power to wield the BanHammer, a weapon forged in the fires of hell for that get-off-my-planet quality you can't get anywhere else. You betta reckonize.
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:41AM
/
/
Posted By andrearoad:

Posted By sjlocke:



Posted By alvarez:
I'm doing so immediately! Thanks for the post! This is simply unacceptable, regardless whether Im a photographer or not!




I'm going to wait a bit, they can't really expect this to fly. We'll see.



Me too. So the new rules will breach the exclusive agreement? 


HQ has anything to say?

As posted in the exclusives forum:

We're currently looking into this. We'll get back with a reply as soon as possible.
toddmedia
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:56AM
It seems limited to Instagram ... for now. So it does not cover sample watermarked images uploaded directly to a FaceBook business page like mine.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:03AM

Posted By flugga:
Something just accurred to me. Does Facebooks terms violate our exclusive agreement? The terms say that Facebook has "non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license".


No. Not to go off topic, but there's a difference requiring your consent to be able to display your work (that's why you upload it, right?) and trying to pull a rights grab, commercializing it via advertising dollars without your consent or benefit.
buzbuzzer
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:05AM
They will have a huge Model Release problem..
wdstock
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloads
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:05AM
Outrageous!!
toddmedia
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:11AM
theasis
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 1,249 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:56AM
Posted By buzbuzzer:
They will have a huge Model Release problem..


Or maybe not. Maybe the person posting the photo will have the problem:

(iii) you agree to pay for all royalties, fees, and any other monies owed by reason of Content you post on or through the Service;
IngaNielsen
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:01AM
Posted By buzbuzzer:
They will have a huge Model Release problem..


And a property release problem...
alvarez
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:02AM
i dont think they'll have a model release problem, because in the Terms it states that you warrant that any content you upload to Instagram has been cleared of any third party rights (i summarized it). Which basically means that anything you upload should be perfectly legal. If not, then you are the person responsible, not Instagram/FB. At least thats how i understand it
swilmor
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:05AM
Posted By toddmedia:
It is leading to violence...

http://www.thelocal.se/45142/20121218/#.UNB4ZG_AexU

That has nothing to do with the new TOS
braddy
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:32AM

Posted By alvarez:
i dont think they'll have a model release problem, because in the Terms it states that you warrant that any content you upload to Instagram has been cleared of any third party rights (i summarized it). Which basically means that anything you upload should be perfectly legal. If not, then you are the person responsible, not Instagram/FB. At least thats how i understand it


That's not true - the TOS cannot override national or state privacy/copyright laws. There are some big hurdles for them to overcome in regards to licensing - it's a huge legal task. Flickr tried it and ended up partnering with Getty Images to make it work. Remember, much of the content on IG is of places, people and objects that would require releases. There is no way someone is going to get around the risk licensing a shot of children, for example, without permission.
BercCLOSED
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:42AM
Posted By Westbury:
Btw it is still possible to use the Instagram app without uploading anything to Instagram i.e. just save to camera roll, so I wouldn't panic.

From what I've heard, the full res sized image gets ULed to their server before you even hit the UL button . So please, do start panicking
MotoEd
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:51AM
Posted By Berc:

Posted By Westbury:
Btw it is still possible to use the Instagram app without uploading anything to Instagram i.e. just save to camera roll, so I wouldn't panic.


From what I've heard, the full res sized image gets ULed to their server before you even hit the UL button . So please, do start panicking wink


I had a photo I previously wanted to use instagram to process, but wanted to keep it private and only share individually with someone. The only way I could find to prevent an image upload to the instagram service was to put my phone in airplane mode, save to camera roll, then when it said, "upload failed" I canceled it because I had it in my camera roll.


This may have been previous version ago, I don't know if that still stands.


I plan to go through and "retrieve" my images and sit tight till the dust settles on this one. I'll be optomistic this settles reasonably, but I'll be prepared if I need to remove my account.
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 6Next page
Displaying 21 to 40 of 104 matches.
Not a member?Join