”Intellectual property is the oil of the 21 century. Look at the richest men a hundred years ago; they all made their money extracting natural resources or moving them around. All today’s richest men have made their money out of intellectual property.“ –Mark Getty, founder of Getty Images
Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
101–110 of 282 posts
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#102This reminds me of 500px. I used to be a huge fan of 500px. It was the most beautiful photography site on the internet, designed with attention to every tiny detail. It allowed you to share your photos under a CC license, presented them beautifully and had fantastic curated feeds with photos by fantastic photographers. In 2018 they were acquired by an investor company and partnered exclusively with Getty. As a contri…
pixelfed.org is another great platform - and it's powered by ActivityPub, so you can host your own and federate it with others.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
The shared for-profit part of the scheme. It's one thing to hire a lawyer to get a license respected, it's another to institute to what amounts to a fraud scheme: Publish images with as hidden license requirements as possible, "hire" a lawyer for free with a profit sharing agreement, then sue who you can. That profit sharing agreement is illegal here, but hard to prove, and the Abmahnindustrie is actively protected b…
> Publish images with as hidden license requirements as possible What exactly was going on? Have they published images in misleading way? Or is it case of going after people who published images with "source: Internet"? Or case of attacking people who made honest effort to attribute author? Because I am familiar with big corporations using freely licensed work and ignoring attribution requirements. For example Facebo…
No, wrong target - big enterprises have lawyers of their own. The target goal here is the 13 year old that published a fan page on neocities. He won't defend himself, the parents will pay, and that the claimed image licensing costs are way higher than what usually can be claimed in such a situation they will not notice.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#104This reminds me of 500px. I used to be a huge fan of 500px. It was the most beautiful photography site on the internet, designed with attention to every tiny detail. It allowed you to share your photos under a CC license, presented them beautifully and had fantastic curated feeds with photos by fantastic photographers. In 2018 they were acquired by an investor company and partnered exclusively with Getty. As a contri…
pixelfed.org is another great platform - and it's powered by ActivityPub, so you can host your own and federate it with others.
I can warmly recommend Pixelfed, it would be great to get some talented photographers on board.
However, it's more like Instagram and not really suited for uploading a high-quality high-resolution portfolio. It's also not really suited for finding photos for a project.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Creative Commons caused many issues in countries like Germany, with photographers publishing under CC with attribution clause, then hunting for sites using photos without or with not 100% correct attribution (in illegal pro-profit cooperations with lawyers) and suing the site owners for thousands of dollars. It really would have to be CC0, but even mentioning CC will raise a red flag for many now.
CC0 (with a zero, without the -BY part) is equivalent to public domain. I don't see how it would allow for the German popular sport of "Abmahnen" (threatening to sue). The reason it exists is that not all jurisdictions have a concept of public domain. But yes, of course, if you use pictures under a CC-BY-* license, then you must comply with the terms (including attribution).
It's still called CC. I am aware of the licenses and their requirements, others who hear about the active scam will only see CC license and be alarmed. That's all I wrote above.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#106> This is not one of those tech acquisitions where the company is bought to be shut down.
I’ll believe it when I see it. I didn’t know there was any other kind of tech acquisition.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#107does anyone have any guesstimates about their business side of things? i know they raised a series A focused on crypto (https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/15/unsplash-simple-token-seri...) but ironically they seem to have completely missed out on this NFT wave.
serving up that many images every day is costly. im guessing they ran out of money.
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#108They also did a FAQs page about it:
https://help.unsplash.com/en/articles/5097983-unsplash-getty...
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#109> Unsplash will continue to operate as a standalone brand and division of Getty Images. The entire Unsplash team will be staying and building Unsplash in the direction we have been. The main difference now is we have access to the resources and experience of Getty Images to help accelerate our plans to create the world’s most useful visual asset library. Sounds so familiar. How many times have we heard this one? How…
Just to save calories in case someone actually spends non-zero time thinking about this: it is never true. Its a "put 2 and 2 together" type thing.
- Getty is a for-profit organization.
- Profit means money.
- Getty is lawsuit-happy.
Now it is only a matter of time before Unsplash is "incredible journey'd".
Re: Unsplash is being acquired by Getty Images
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Creative Commons caused many issues in countries like Germany, with photographers publishing under CC with attribution clause, then hunting for sites using photos without or with not 100% correct attribution (in illegal pro-profit cooperations with lawyers) and suing the site owners for thousands of dollars. It really would have to be CC0, but even mentioning CC will raise a red flag for many now.
> hunting for sites using photos without or with not 100% correct attribution I do not see what is wrong about this part (other than the illegal(?) nexus with lawyers). CC licences still have to be complied with (or the user can contact the copyright holder for an alternative licence). GPL infringers have been taken to court as well, and a legal, for-profit litigation initiative might be a good incentive that encoura…
Since I've been victim of this practice, let me elaborate:
There are individuals in Germany (two photographers IIRC) who upload photos to the Wikipedia. The licence is always CC with attribution, but that part is badly presented on Wiki (or was). Next thing, they wait for people to use their images and go around to sue everyone who doesn't display the attribution string alongside the image. It is just predatory behavior. They guy sent me an E-Mail with an pay early option. Their claims are also this weak, that the guy trying to pull this off with me was instantly silenced after our lawyer sent him a single letter.