ph. Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Sirs, I do occasionally explore this site, and find your ancient posts ad cameras at bygone times interesting, However, on recent visits, Forum access is almosty impossible without conquering the long text obstacle where one has to agree to sell ones soul - at least in order to get out of that textual trap one has to agree to something (probably unenforceable in Europe). I appreciate the intentions of your site revamp : presumably well meaning , traffic-generating and the obstacle course probalbly demanded by some unreasonable legal entity , but please reinstate a quick way to access the forum. p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin McAmera Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Do you mean the terms & conditions? I only saw that once, and it hasn't appeared again. I guess there must be a cookie that stores that you clicked Accept; so if you block that cookie, or maybe script, maybe it doesn't record that you did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Seaman Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Yes you should only see it once - after scrolling down to the bottom and clicking "agree". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Katz Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 The good news is that at least there is evidence of some form of a sentient being still working on PN on behalf of it's corporate masters. The only troublesome term was the indemnification clause, which I will need to look at again. The rest is just typical corporate BS and CYA type provisions. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemorrellNL Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 I saw the (very long) 'terms and conditions' statement and 'acceptance requirement' for the very first time today though I log into PN almost daily. So it's a very recent thing. IMHO, it's not the most 'subtle' or 'member-friendly' way of getting members to accept some terms and conditions. Like you, as I read I had the feeling that I was 'selling my soul' to PN. I very much suspect that some legal department at Creative Live/Fiverr/Invisioncommunity woke up to the fact (or decided that it was high time) that they needed to 'protect and limit their legal liabilities'. Hence the legal blurb. A more elegant way (as most forums & social media companies do) would have been to just include a check box whereby members agree to to the site's terms and conditions. With a link to these 'terms and conditions' for anyone who really wants to plough through them. 2 hours ago, ph. said: Sirs, I do occasionally explore this site, and find your ancient posts ad cameras at bygone times interesting, However, on recent visits, Forum access is almosty impossible without conquering the long text obstacle where one has to agree to sell ones soul - at least in order to get out of that textual trap one has to agree to something (probably unenforceable in Europe). I appreciate the intentions of your site revamp : presumably well meaning , traffic-generating and the obstacle course probalbly demanded by some unreasonable legal entity , but please reinstate a quick way to access the forum. p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 These terms were virtually the same that I had to agree to when I first joined PN. All the stuff about rights in regards to content, behavior when on the site, and legal matters are nothing new. What do you think you agreed to when you joined Amazon, got a credit card, opened a bank account, subscribed to Photoshop or, in the old days, bought the software license? This was, by any standard, a rather short and understandable agreement. And the print size was actually legible! You could have clicked through this without reading just as you can click a checkbox without first reading. Every “corporate master” on the planet requires such an agreement. Not sure why the present case would be any different. Not sure how long the active administration will last, but I’m trying to embrace it and the improvements made in the last few days rather than complain about something pretty much as standard as running water (unless you live in Flint, MI). 2 1 1 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudita Posted January 23, 2023 Share Posted January 23, 2023 To lay the matter to rest here is a link on the Wayback Machine to January 18, 2010. A version of this TOS and other agreements can be found for virually any year that PhotoNet has provided a link to one. https://web.archive.org/web/20100118095139/http://photo.net/info/terms-of-use The only matter that has really changed concerns who our owners are, and new privacy laws. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_richards Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 On 1/21/2023 at 8:43 AM, marc epstein said: In the gallery, the images are not manageable? Some images are duplicated and unable to delete the, some cannot be viewed? Can this be fixed? Thanks for helping I agree, I keep getting the message when I try to open one of my images that I do not have permission. This is getting old very fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 1 hour ago, g_richards said: I agree, I keep getting the message when I try to open one of my images that I do not have permission. This is getting old very fast. Hello, I note that many of your images are marked as "hidden". Is it possible that this is what is causing the problem? Do you have the ability to selct and unhide those images? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Peri Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 On 1/23/2023 at 10:32 PM, SiteHelp said: To lay the matter to rest here is a link on the Wayback Machine to January 18, 2010. A version of this TOS and other agreements can be found for virually any year that PhotoNet has provided a link to one. https://web.archive.org/web/20100118095139/http://photo.net/info/terms-of-use The only matter that has really changed concerns who our owners are, and new privacy laws. Would you very kindly tell us how the new privacy laws affect the document that was presented to us, I did not see this in the document we were given to agree to? The following statement is now illegal (in Europe at least) and therefore any agreement given by a member in order to access his file is invalid: "We respect our users' intellectual property, and claim no copyright to anything posted on the site by our users. However, as a stipulation of using photo.net, we retain the right to keep and display anything posted by users on photo.net as part of the site indefinitely". Forgive me for harping on the subject, but many of us for different reasons think it imperative to be able to control our personal data, and photos uploaded on PN and I believe it is really important that this issue be clarified, and in writing. Thank you for your understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 "We respect our users' intellectual property, and claim no copyright to anything posted on the site by our users. However, as a stipulation of using photo.net, we retain the right to keep and display anything posted by users on photo.net as part of the site indefinitely". I support full control of our own image content. The word "indefinitley" should be sruck and be amended to "...until the copyright holder deletes said content." An exception would be content posted into a forum as part of a discussion. This must remain so as to keep the discussion understandable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Peri Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 7 minutes ago, WJT said: I suport full control of our own image content. The word "indefinitley" should be sruck and be amended to "...until the copyright holder deletes said content." An exception would be content posted into a forum as part of a discussion. This must remain so as to keep the discussion understandable. WJT, Thank you for your prompt reply, I appreciate it, I am reassured as I am certain other members will be also. There remains a technical problem to be solved which has been pointed out by some already. We delete images and they occasionally re-appear on the site. Hopefully, this will be solved shortly. Again, much appreciated, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Katz Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 I agree with WJT, especially for users who have an extensive portfolio loaded on PN (which I do not). I believe that in some limited circumstances, the moderators can remove content from the forums, but that should only be an occasional event. I don't expect PN, or any web site would be providing legal opinions to users regarding site compliance with privacy laws worldwide. It is possible that PN is not currently in compliance with certain EU (and other) requirements, and PN management will have to decide what to do about it. FYI, the current T&C Indemnification clause trigger events have been broadened from the 2010 version to include issues arising out of the Users use and access to PN. I don't think I am terribly fussed about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Vongries Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Folks, I am the farthest thing from an attorney. When something is put on the internet, it can be removed from the place where it was posted, and that is work in progress, but it is forever. That has been shown time and again. Emphasis, and again with very limited resources, is on functionality. In due course, the rest will come. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 (edited) I, too, would like to be able to delete images from personal galleries, but not content posted to forums for the reason WJT states. I’m also realistic, as @Sandy Vongries suggests. I challenge the notion that we “must have the right to change the past.” The world simply was not built that way. The past is, especially on the Internet. All photographers who post to the Internet should take into account that they can demand their photos be removed, but those photos have already been captured by all sorts of entities and mechanisms. We don’t live in a sci-fi world where the past can be erased. We live in a world where what we do about regrets in our past is a matter of changing our future actions. To photographers: post to the Internet knowing that changing your mind about what you post will have limited effect. To models: give permission to photographers to post your pictures to the Internet knowing that, in many ways, there are no backsies. To high school kids: post your drunken party selfies knowing that your college admissions director will see them. Rely on yourself to protect yourself, not the Internet over which you should by now know you have little control, legal citations notwithstanding. Edited January 25, 2023 by samstevens 1 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 26 minutes ago, Sandy Vongries said: I am the farthest thing from an attorney. Careful Sandy, that might just make you a criminal! 🙂 2 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_richards Posted January 30, 2023 Share Posted January 30, 2023 On 1/25/2023 at 11:30 AM, WJT said: Hello, I note that many of your images are marked as "hidden". Is it possible that this is what is causing the problem? Do you have the ability to selct and unhide those images? Good question. I don't know how my images became hidden? I will check that out. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJT Posted January 30, 2023 Share Posted January 30, 2023 1 hour ago, g_richards said: Good question. I don't know how my images became hidden? I will check that out. Thank you. Let me know what you find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemorrellNL Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 On 1/25/2023 at 7:02 PM, WJT said: "We respect our users' intellectual property, and claim no copyright to anything posted on the site by our users. However, as a stipulation of using photo.net, we retain the right to keep and display anything posted by users on photo.net as part of the site indefinitely". I support full control of our own image content. The word "indefinitley" should be sruck and be amended to "...until the copyright holder deletes said content." An exception would be content posted into a forum as part of a discussion. This must remain so as to keep the discussion understandable. Just my 2 (or more) cts: The quoted 'condition' is not specifically about photos but applies to 'anything posted by users' (including text) Photo's are posted on PN in two very different forms: - in galleries - as attachments to posts (Notably, but not exclusive to the 'No Words' forum) Members can always delete photos from a public or private gallery. In principle, these photos should then disappear forever on PN. However, if a member attaches a photo to a post (with an 'edit limit' of 15 minutes) then their post - including attached photos - are in principle 'preserved for posterity'. In other words, InvisionCommunity (in this case PN) reserves the right to retain posts - possibly with attached - photos indefinitely. Like @Sandy Vongries, I'm far from being a legal expert. But I can well imagine a lawyer amending a standard 'blanket text' that protects the legal rights of the 'community provider' to retain anything posted in a community indefinitely. Without this 'protection', things could IMHO sometimes become chaotic and unmanageable. For example in cases where a disgruntled forum member requests ( or demands) that: - all or specific his/her (new) posts - and the responses to these be deleted - all of his/her responses to threads initiated by other members be deleted - etc. It seems to me to be pretty much impossible to 'unthread' a member on all forums on his/her request. So I quite understand the 'legal protection' that whatever you post 'can be retained and displayed indefinitely'. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin McAmera Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 (edited) At Flickr, if a user closes their account, any text they posted as comments on photos and in discussions is retained. Otherwise conversations would become nonsensical. The deleted user's name is replaced by a random one (they're quite funny: I have old comments from 'disastrous hands (deleted)' and 'imported stew (deleted)' ). There's no profile page for 'imported stew'. I'd have to go and search to find out if anything like 'attachments' even exists at Flickr, let alone what happens to them... Another thing about the Terms of Service (sorry for the thread-drift): I don't see anything in the Terms that forbids forbidden uses of the site (hate speech, harrassment, porn, spam, criminal plotting, political campaigning, ...) Edited February 2, 2023 by Dustin McAmera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samstevens Posted February 2, 2023 Share Posted February 2, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Dustin McAmera said: Another thing about the Terms of Service (sorry for the thread-drift): I don't see anything in the Terms that forbids forbidden uses of the site (hate speech, harrassment, porn, spam, criminal plotting, political campaigning, ...) A bit general, but it addresses some things … ”Members at all levels agree not to post prohibited material, engage in personal attacks or attacks against the general membership, or to behave in a way that disturbs the general community. Action is solely at the discretion of the Moderators and Administrators and may vary from a simple warning to a full ban and/or termination.” Edited February 2, 2023 by samstevens 1 "You talkin' to me?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen_h Posted February 7, 2023 Share Posted February 7, 2023 On 1/25/2023 at 10:02 AM, WJT said: "We respect our users' intellectual property, and claim no copyright to anything posted on the site by our users. However, as a stipulation of using photo.net, we retain the right to keep and display anything posted by users on photo.net as part of the site indefinitely". I support full control of our own image content. The word "indefinitley" should be sruck and be amended to "...until the copyright holder deletes said content." An exception would be content posted into a forum as part of a discussion. This must remain so as to keep the discussion understandable. Sounds good, but likely won't work. Servers cache things to make access faster. It takes some time for those to time out, so even if it is deleted from the original source, it might still be around for some time. Given that, and the way the US legal system works, no-one can guarantee that it isn't still visible. And obviously, if someone else downloaded it, PN deleting doesn't help. It can be cached in users' browsers indefinitely. PN might make a "best effort" to remove anything that you delete, but can't be legally responsible in those cases where computers do what they like to do. -- glen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now