41–50 of 391 posts
Browser extension that restores functionality by end of the week? (At least Bing has really good image search.)
Until Getty goes after Bing too, from the scant details in the article. This is why I'm scared of Twitch getting big enough to draw itself into publishers' crosshairs and have similar controls for copyright and stuff as YouTube does.
Wow, Google. Inconvenient as fuck. Put it back right away. I don’t even want to use image search anymore. Seriously fucking shitty, shitty, shitty idea. EDIT: This is the result of litigation with Getty Images? Guess who I’m boycotting. This isn’t the first time they’ve had their fingerprints on bad news.
Ugh, I've been using right-click > copy image address pretty habitually everywhere else. Guess I gotta get in the habit of doing it with google images now too. Idiotic change, isn't bureaucracy great.
Richer click and copy url doesn’t even work on google search results anymore. You just get the google analytics redirection crap. Bleargh.
(google.de, chrome, but that shouldn't matter much)
So it’s ok for google to scrape and save images and display them without compensating photographers (which I’m cool with), but not users? This is bizarre, anti user functionality. By default if the image is available on the web, it is meant to be seen. This is going to make high school PowerPoint users spend more time, and result in zero extra revenue and zero drop in copyright infringement. The more interesting ques…
Google for that exact phrase and see who made that observation.
Wow, Google. Inconvenient as fuck. Put it back right away. I don’t even want to use image search anymore. Seriously fucking shitty, shitty, shitty idea. EDIT: This is the result of litigation with Getty Images? Guess who I’m boycotting. This isn’t the first time they’ve had their fingerprints on bad news.
It's... not because they want to. Getty sued them; it's a change they're begrudgingly making.
Here’s one reason in particular:
So it’s ok for google to scrape and save images and display them without compensating photographers (which I’m cool with), but not users? This is bizarre, anti user functionality. By default if the image is available on the web, it is meant to be seen. This is going to make high school PowerPoint users spend more time, and result in zero extra revenue and zero drop in copyright infringement. The more interesting ques…
They got sued.
"These changes came about in part due to our settlement with Getty Images this week."
So it’s ok for google to scrape and save images and display them without compensating photographers (which I’m cool with), but not users? This is bizarre, anti user functionality. By default if the image is available on the web, it is meant to be seen. This is going to make high school PowerPoint users spend more time, and result in zero extra revenue and zero drop in copyright infringement. The more interesting ques…
>Google has long been under fire from photographers and publishers who felt that image search allowed people to steal their pictures, and the removal of the view image button is one of many changes being made in response. A deal to show copyright information and improve attribution of Getty photos was announced last week and included these changes.
Using the context menu to "Open Image in New Tab" essentially does the same thing so the functionality is still there.