Use Twit Pic? DON'T!

PopeBuckfastXVI

http://www.aphotoeditor.com/2011/05/11/twitpic-plans-to-sell-your-images-so-it-can-profit/

…you hereby grant Twitpic a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of…” and “…after you remove or delete your media from the Service provided that any sub-license by Twitpic to use, reproduce or distribute the Content prior to such termination may be perpetual and irrevocable.

AnCatDubh

Instagram used to be the same. I remember Peter Cox taking issue with them over it but they bowed to pressure and altered their terms.

I think you need to be careful as to the T&C of services particularly now as many services are signing you up simply with a click of your twitter or facebook identity.

In fairness, they need to have some rights in order that you don't sue them at some point in time over having your image on their site, but it needs to be way better worded and avoid any rights grab implied or perceived.

Paulw

It's a clear rights grab attempt, especially now that a media outlet has a share in twitpic.

Definitely a site to avoid now. :mad:

zinzan

Twitpic have denied this and posted this correction:

your-content-your-copyrights/

UE Dar

I never read the terms and conditions on sites, i will from now on however as i have recently started photography ( urban exploration ).

Probably not the right place to ask but is photobucket like this??

DaireQuinlan

zinzan wrote: »

Twitpic have denied this and posted this correction:

your-content-your-copyrights/

nope, they've "clarified" it ...
Notable quotes are ...
"Our terms state by uploading content to Twitpic you allow us to distribute that content on twitpic.com and our affiliated partners."

"We’ve partnered with organizations to help us combat this and to distribute newsworthy content in the appropriate manner."

No word whatsoever as to whether or not the content owner actually has a say in whether or not their shots are 'distributed' and, if they are distributed, whether or not the content owner will actually be compensated .

PCPhoto

they are basically saying you give us the right to distribute your image (no mention of who makes the money from it - my guess is it wont be the person uploading an image)

essentially they have re-worded the terms and conditions so you don't see it clearly....it has not changed a thing because if you delete the image there is nothing to say they had not already "sent" the image to their affiliates and its "that" image which they are distributing and not the original image which you uploaded....confused :eek:

meh - nothing has changed only the wording of the terms and conditions.

SetOverSet

From British Journal of Photography :eek:

"Earlier this year, WENN signed a similar deal with Plixi, another service used to post images on Twitter. According to Amateur Photographer magazine, Beiny said that "Plixi first approached WENN to 'see if we could help them out, after noticing that newspapers, magazines and websites increasingly publish images taken by celebrities from Twitter for free and without permission." "Beiny didn't "rule out selling on other types of Twitter images to the wider media, such as pictures of a breaking news story, if it were brought to its attention, whether featuring a celebrity or not," according to Amateur Photographer."

" ... both companies have failed to clarify whether copyright owners - the people who have taken the photos or uploaded them on TwitPic - will receive a share of the proceeds generated when sold through WENN."