I applaud this only because of Getty and AFP's willingness to prosecute others for the same and their unwillingness to share photos for personal/noncommercial use.
But this is a sad day. I've been a professional photographer for over 10 years, and it makes me sick how paranoid others in the industry are.
Why is it OK to quote what someone said for a news article, but not use their photo with proper attribution? Because they spent a couple hundred dollars on a camera? Why is a picture some sacrosanct object but what someone says worthless? You're pressing a button on a camera and then pressing some buttons on a computer later.
The balance of power is completely wrong, and photographers, musical artists, and other "creatives" only shoot themselves in the foot by slathering watermarks, issuing crazy copyright notices, and using DRM on their photos/creative works.
If proper attribution is given to the creator (same as quoting what someone says) then photographs should be shared. Encouraging the sharing of photos I've taken for clients has only increased my business. It's better for society.
But this is a sad day. I've been a professional photographer for over 10 years, and it makes me sick how paranoid others in the industry are.
Why is it OK to quote what someone said for a news article, but not use their photo with proper attribution? Because they spent a couple hundred dollars on a camera? Why is a picture some sacrosanct object but what someone says worthless? You're pressing a button on a camera and then pressing some buttons on a computer later.
The balance of power is completely wrong, and photographers, musical artists, and other "creatives" only shoot themselves in the foot by slathering watermarks, issuing crazy copyright notices, and using DRM on their photos/creative works.
If proper attribution is given to the creator (same as quoting what someone says) then photographs should be shared. Encouraging the sharing of photos I've taken for clients has only increased my business. It's better for society.