Tumblr photo blogs and copyright

[MichaelChang]

<p>The recent acquisition of Tumblr by Yahoo for $1.1B prompted me to look into what the fuss was about, and to my surprise there are a fair number of photography blogs solely for the purpose of compiling images from the net. Some credit its owners and provide links to the original image while others do not. Example:<br>

<a href="http://ethostheatre.tumblr.com/archive">http://ethostheatre.tumblr.com/archive</a></p>

<p>The ones I've visited have basic disclaimers that reads something like "Please contact me if you see your work here and would like it removed or credited". The posts are often reblogged by others.</p>

<p>I guess the burden is on the owner to discover and claim ownership of their images. </p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Tumblr is indeed a monument to copyright infringement. It's one of the worst (large scale) operations in that regard. Yahoo says they won't screw it up, but in that respect, it <em>needs</em> to be broken.</p>

[sknowles]

<p>I'm not sure Tumblr is entirely to blame for any copyright infringement because there's two parts to the problem.</p>

<p>First, the most common feature with Tumblr is reblogging which doesn't link to the original image but copies it to the reblogger's post/blog. This allows images belonging to members who removed their images or left Tumblr altogether to stay effectively forever. They also allow people to blog/reblog images from Flickr overriding Flickr's image protection features.</p>

<p>Members can also set their blog to reblog posts and images of other members easily which you see this when you log in and scan the posts and images of those you follow and reblog is just a click by the user either immediately or into a queue (maximum number per hour/day). A lot of blogs are almost entirely comprised of reblogs.</p>

<p>The second is people post high resolution images to Tumblr and not just Web quality images. This is especially true of the photographers with Tumblr accounts using it to advertise their work or business. And if the images are good, that leads to reblogging. And downloading any image on Tumblr is just a right click action.</p>

<p>As for Yahoo buying Tumblr, they promise not to change anything but immediately both CEO's announced adding a feature to control "adult content" which means they have to program it and decide if this is by post, blog, reblog or user. A lot of members reblog a mix of images and leave it to the viewer to just skip anything they don't like.</p>

<p>I think everyone expects change with Tumblr and expects it will lose its edge and interest for young people who are the mainstay of Tumblr by adding requirements for Yahoo membership with more information and having more oversight, more censorship, etc., but especially the designs. Tumblr has a huge array of designs for users from indepedent developers. I don't see Yahoo allowing that without more rules stifling creativity and inclusion of ads.</p>

[grh]

<p>It's the interweb. Watermark your image, and if you don't want to lose control over it, don't post it.</p>

[EricM]

<p>Pintrest </p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>I must admit that poking around Tumblr has made me feel as if I've been living in a cave. The amount of startlingly high quality photography is just mind boggling and I can see how young people are gravitating toward and becoming loyal to the site.</p>

<p>It's so easy to discover new member/content just through clicking on the rebloggers. </p>

<p>Scott, it didn't take long for me to come across some serious adult content, stuff that'll even raise eyebrows here. I don't think Yahoo will have much choice about that. </p>

 

[steve_mareno1]

<p>Does anyone else out there get the impression that once so many gazillion photographs are compiled on these computers, and the appropriate software is designed so that anyone can order up an image to their desired specs for a small price, us photographers are as dead in the water as a mackerel? Not that I'm making any real money on my stuff (hope springs eternal though), but this looks seriously bad. I'd better get one of those pot holder looms and see if I can make some money over on Etsy.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>"Does anyone else out there get the impression that once so many gazillion photographs are compiled on these computers, and the appropriate <a id="itxthook2" href="/casual-conversations-forum/00bgTV?unified_p=1" rel="nofollow">software<img id="itxthook2icon" src="http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png" alt="" /></a> is designed so that anyone can order up an image to their desired specs for a small price..."<br /><br />Is it 1998 there? This is how its done already.</p>

[parv]

steve, you would love this article about need of professional photographer: http://blogs.nppa.org/advocacy/2013/05/28/mayercomments/

[MichaelChang]

<p>Thanks for the link, parv. </p>

<p>I particularly like this quote from the article:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"NPPA President Borland also wrote that “being a professional means more than earning a living from a skill . . . it means educating, informing and inspiring the public everyday through our work. It also means abiding by standards, ethics and principles.”</p>

</blockquote>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>It's worse than that John. In my head it will always be 1966, the Allman Brothers are playing w/ The Meters for $5, and I leave the keys under the mat and tell my friends that if they come over and I'm not home, just come on inside and there's beer in the fridge.</p>

<p>My point is that once the rights to a photograph are "given up", (or legally stolen), and a computer is programmed to manipulate a huge data base of images in order to give someone the photo they desire for a fee, you no longer need any new images. They're all there in the system, and what isn't there can be edited by the software from the existing data base to produce "new" images. Ergo, why do you need any photographers at that point? To stand around in a photo vest w/ (empty) film canisters protruding from every pocket, a camera hung 'round his or her neck, and standing around in a museum?</p>

[sknowles]

<p>I forgot comment on the original question of photo credit. Tumblr allows blog designers to establish their own visible features and tools, and some include the "source" blog entry and some don't where you have to search the rebloggers or check the first entry in "notes" (not easy with a lot of reblogs or likes), but nowhere is the actual photographer mentioned except through the original blog. The only standard Tumblr has is every blog as an archive where you just add "/archive" after the blog name to get the history of entries. It's sometimes easier than scanning through the blog.</p>

<p>We've also kinda' wandered off topic with the subject here but to Michael, you're right Yahoo will try to convert a younger generation's blog Website to a family oriented one which doesn't fit the original concept and design and the current mode of Tumblr. While there are some rules regarding pornography on Tumblr, they're to say the least, far less than Yahoo's standards. My view is simple, you can skip the entries or the blog altogether. You don't need someone else telling you what's decent or not, but sadly that will be a thing of the past as Tumblr complies with Yahoo's policies.</p>

[EricM]

<p>I was just reading <a href="http://www.ppa.com/article.cfm?ItemNumber=4020">this PPA article </a></p>

<p>"...the comments made this week by Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer, citing her words as reckless, bad for society, and shockingly out of touch with reality. On Tuesday, Mayer said..."</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"There's no such thing as Flickr Pro, because today, with cameras as pervasive as they are, there is no such thing, really, as a professional photographer."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Lovely this Yahoo stuff </p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Eric, Mayer may have expressed her view in a way that offended many, but in her defense CEOs of her caliber are in the business of predicting the future and to steer corporate direction accordingly. </p>

<p>Action speaks for itself, and there are as many corporations snubbing their noses at conventional wisdom behind closed doors while setting policies to institute change. I can think of many examples where disruptive changes have fundamentally altered the landscape with digital photography, smartphones, portable computing, entertainment content, photo journalism etc. </p>

<p>I also reject her statement as a blanket characterization of photography, but taken within the context of setting future corporate direction from objectively observing how trends are being shaped, her words might actually have some validity for all of us to at least think about. </p>

[EricM]

<blockquote>

<p>"...her words might actually have some validity for all of us to at least think about."<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Totally agree, Michael, once you step into that mindset and start rowing that way.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>To my non photo friends and associates (in their 20/30's), Mayer POV is correct. They don't pay (or ask permission) if from the web, for their media content (TV, music, movies, photos, video etc...) Moreover, they don't think about it at all, it's like a giving. I think their POV is the mainstream, and that's what Mayer is saying, rightly so or not...</p>

<p> </p>