Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Pinterest: A Short History Of Dissent

Why I tearfully Deleted My Pinterest Inspiration Boards The floodgates open here.

Not Pining Over Pinning - Why I said Goodbye To Pinterest Because I've stopped to think about art. And about artists/photographers/writers/etc.[...] about what happens when the individual who made the piece can't control how it's used, but a corporation can.

Five Reasons Why I Hate Pinterest “OMG!!1 did you find this on Pinterest?”. Nope, actually found it on thebeautydepartment.com or other wonderful original content website/blog.

How Pinterest removed all my pinned images in minutes Note: Pinterest is now wise to this trick, it didn't work for me.

Pinterest Blocking Meta Tag Using the disallowing metatag is not a solution to the predatory behaviour Pinterest encourages.

Pinterest and “Pinning Etiquette” ...credit and/or a link is not a way to get around copyright infringement.

Thoughts From Others on Pinterest So Pinterest wants to make it easy for you to take any of the infringed work they have on their servers, and include it in any blog post you feel like. No need to license artwork. They’re teaching everyone to help themselves to the buffet of infringed upon works they have collected.

Pinterest: Delightful, Addictive, Theft ...more than early Napster, more than Megaupload, more than any government-seized hip-hop blog, Pinterest is entirely copyright-infringement.

Is Pinterest the new Napster? The rate of usage reflects the fact that, like Napster, those who use the service often become addicted to getting access to the best content in one place, in this case images.

It's Not A Secret There have been a few articles popping up discussing Pinterest’s use of Skimlinks, so we wanted to dive in and talk about what they are doing, as it’s not a secret or sneaky or covert, but a very popular, mainstream, and valuable approach to content monetization.

The Problem With Pinterest SO MANY of these are stolen photos my friends. Stolen from the photographers who took them, some who make their living off of them.

Pinterest Comes With Pros And Cons For Photographers The DMCA shields services like pinterest that display user content, but that doesn't mean that the users themselves are not in violation, it just means pinterest can't be held liable for the action. Pinterest is pretty disingenuous on this issue—their terms tell people only to post material for which they have permission or rights while knowing perfectly well that the services is designed for and encourages them to post material mostly without permission.

Is Pinterest a Haven for Copyright Violations? If someone pins a photo on Pinterest, they've created a competing version of the image, which could siphon image search traffic away from the source site.

Pinterest is Changing How I Blog I have so many fun ideas that I’d love to share, but I’d also like to create products out of those designs eventually… so it’s leaving me unsure of where to go from here with my blog.

Pinterest and an artist’s dilemma Pinterest is different. When you add a new pin, you’re asked for the address of a web page; the site loads the page, pulls a prominent image from the page, and shows it within Pinterest. While you’re viewing your friends’ pins, there’s no direct way to visit the original source; a source link is only available on the pin detail popup. (Clicking the full-size image or the inconspicuous source link above the image sends you to the source site.) These popups show images at full size, so there’s very little motivation for normal users to visit the original author’s site; the Pinterest user can view everything from his friends without ever leaving the site.

Pinterest’s Quiet Copyright CoupPinterest is merely putting the proverbial lipstick on their copyright abusing pig. Pinterest users can STILL save any image from any website, and upload it to Pinterest (removing any value to the originating site) where it can then be repinned into oblivion.

When did it become OK to take someone’s stuff without asking?[Pinterest] also creates a decent-sized copy of the image, which it hosts on its own servers and displays to Pinterest visitors. Unless you’ve got any desire to see the photo at its full resolution or want to find out more about a particular link, there’s no great incentive to look any further.

Pinterest: A Broken Business Model So by their own admission Pinterest isn’t primarily for publishing original creative work, but republishing the work of third parties who almost inevitably will not have given permission. [...]Pinterest is a cynical exercise that enables and encourages others to steal and is profiting from those thefts, while simultaneously attempting to plead innocence and place the blame on those who Pinterest encouraged to steal in the first place. But when the lawyers come calling, as they surely will, Pinterest may find that by shafting both creators and consumers of culture they have precious few friends left to defend them.

Pinterest has a Loaded TOS… Don’t Accept it However, as a web developer who just had to put that snippet onto my clients’ websites I don’t think it’s a good direction to head where one business model requires every website on the Internet to opt out of their environment. Here’s a better idea… ask us if we want to opt into the Pinterest service… let those websites willing to play in the little sandpit of their business model to put a piece of code into every clients website.

Some More Pinterest Detective Work ...are they missing the hidden usage – that of Pinterest’s users monetizing others’ works in a commercial marketing way?

Is Pinterest a copyright time bomb? [Pinterest] relies on its terms of use to 'ensure' — and by that I mean a wink and nod — that all images are owned by the users who post them. So millions of users, using browser add-its for grabbing photos, are of course just doing this on their own websites, right? And if they're not, Pinterest would be shocked.

Could Pinterest become the next Napster? When you take it without payment, you effectively reduce the ability of artists, photographers to create more good stuff, because they are not compensated for it

What Does Pinterest Look Like Without Copyrighted Content? To continue existing, Pinterest is required to write terms of service that, if fully and actively enforced, would destroy the site.

Pinterest Founder Nukes His Own Account [Silbermann's] account, which had nearly a million followers and almost 4000 pins, was quietly pulled offline a few weeks ago. A modest replacement has been started from scratch. "Starting a fresh new account to remember how new Pinterest user's [sic] feel!”

Copyright Infringement Made Cool Pinterest might claim that they have no knowledge of each individual infringement, but are they really unaware that infringement is taking place across a wide spectrum of their user base? Good luck convincing a jury of that.

Copyright Infringement Makes Me Buck Like Bodacious When the electric bill comes, you can’t tell the electric company, “I will credit your name to pay for the bill.”

Why I’m Not a Pinterest Fan: A Small Seller’s Point of View While I do get marginal traffic from Pinterest (and by marginal I mean less than 50 total referrals over a month, far fewer than my other networks), it’s not proportionate to the amount of views, repins, likes, etc., that I get on Pinterest.

Copyright Infringement Makes Me Buck Like Bodacious When the electric bill comes, you can’t tell the electric company, “I will credit your name to pay for the bill.”

Pinterest Copyright Concerns ...if it is illegal I am sure something will be done.

The End Of The Road For Free Patterns I have been cornered into making a decision against my own wishes by an unstoppable copyright-infringement steamroller called Pinterest. AKA Napster-for-Images. [...] ...from now on, all the new patterns will be for sale, and only small thumbnails will be shown on the web pages.

Pinning a Lawsuit on You Perhaps the distinction between Pinterest and other internet sites is nothing more than its prominence and focus on image sharing.

Read the fine print; 'Sharing' can get you sued Luther says it's not enough to simply credit the writer, photographer, or artist whose work you're posting. You need to get official permission from the source, because sites like Pinterest, YouTube and Facebook likely won't stand behind you in a lawsuit.

Companies Using Pinterest, Be Careful Not to Get Pricked If the DMCA protects anyone, it is Pinterest and not its users.

Companies Using Pinterest, Be Careful Not to Get Pricked Like Grokster, Pinterest has not employed filtering technology to diminish infringing activity and employs a business model in which "the commercial sense of their enterprise turns on high-volume use."

No Interest In Pinterest I’ve reached critical mass in my frustration around my images being used without permission elsewhere on the internet, but particularly Pinterest.

Pinterest site's massive repository of RB artwork Now with 77 pages of objections.

Copyright Watch: The Liability-Proof World of Pinterest Pinterest puts all legal risk squarely in the lap of its users, while reaping the rewards of their free labor, the free content they upload and their growing appeal to potential advertisers.

Pinterest Traffic Drops Due To Copyright Issues Concerns over Pinterest’s terms of use, specifically ownership of pinned content, caused many dedicated users to delete accounts in fear that they would be held accountable for copyright infringement.

Pinterest - the next Facebook or unlawful copyright infringement? ...be aware that Pinterest’s terms also require you to indemnify them for any liability in using other people’s material; i.e. if they get sued because of what you posted, they can give you the bill and their lawyer’s bill too.

Could Affiliate Links Kill Pinterest? when Pinterest modifies a pin by altering the structure of a link, they stop being an online service provider facilitating users who share content and become a curator of content actively engaged in changing the way it gets shared. Put another way, changing a link could be construed as a form of editorial control.

Changing the Culture of Copyright: Though the Pinterest Terms of Service mandate that users post their own content or have permission to post any third-party content, in reality, the platform implicitly encourages users to pin third-party content regardless of whether the user has obtained permission from the content owner to do so and without necessarily attributing the source of the content. [...] Pinterest itself may be vulnerable to claims of direct and/or secondary liability. In MGM Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd ., 545 U.S. 913 (2005), the Supreme Court ruled that Grokster and StreamCast (dba Morpheus) could be held liable for facilitating the commission of massive amounts of copyright infringement by end users who employed the defendants' peer-to-peer software to copy and redistribute music and films to each other's hard drives.

No comments: