Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/02/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Its great to get expert advice Jack! On your last paragraph I think people use their Facebook site as an alternative website now with the galleries appealing to potential clients and continuing to appeal to present and past clients how are on it. This is why so many people are spending more time and energy tweaking their FB galleries than their own websites. They are also in effect blogs but blogs that people actually look at. And are an extraordinary valuable piece of public relations and or advertizing. A great "meet cute" vehicle...soft sell. On in your last paragraph" you probably shouldn't post anything that might help make that living for you. " you really think a potential client is going to not bother hiring you for the rights of one of your imagers when they can get a small scan it and use it illegally off your FB website? Just not visualizing that but I bet it happened once. I can however see how Facebook use competes directly against the company you work for. (from Linked in) ".... Media will target and deliver your message to the right audience in the most engaging way possible. We provide customized marketing solutions tailored specifically to meet your business goals. With the largest audience in Maine, the combined reach of our print and online products influence over 100,000 households and over 1.2 million unique visitors every month." On 2/2/13 4:39 PM, "Jack Milton" <jmilton2 at maine.rr.com> wrote: > Hi Ken, > I'm not a lawyer, but the photo editor at a daily newspaper. I have > spoken to > a lawyer about photos on Facebook. Facebook, and any other photo sharing > Web > site, and your ISP, for that matter, is just trying to protect itself by > saying that if you post a photo, or other content on FB, FB has the > *right* to > display that photo. It seems a simple enough concept?why would FB need > legal > permission to display content that you've upload to FB for the very > purpose of > displaying it, but that's what's happened in our litigious society. > > Of far more concern to any content producer, is what can happen to your > content (photo) if you post it anywhere on the Internet, or even send it > in an > email to someone you know. It's just TOO easy to "share" (steal) that > content > and use it for some other purpose. That shouldn't stop you from posting > your > photos on FB, or the LUG gallery, or anywhere else. Just be aware that > you're > giving up a lot of control over what happens to that content once you press > that Send or OK button. > > If you're a photographer who is trying to make a living from your > photographs, you probably shouldn't post anything that might help make that > living for you. Share them with your clients, your agency, your employer. > Use > them to advertise you skills. The rest can be posted anywhere you like to > entertain your friends and the world, just expect them to show up in > unexpected places. > > Jack Milton > > On Feb 1, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Ken Carney <kcarney1 at cox.net> wrote: > >> I think this is clear, but I would appreciate any corrections. The >> Facebook >> terms of use state that for any IP content that I post, I retain ownership >> but grant a royalty-free sublicense. From the definition of "content", it >> appears that if I post a link to one of my photos on Facebook, I have >> granted the sublicense for that image, the same as if I had uploaded the >> image to Facebook. Correct? Thanks for any help. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/