28 thoughts on “Miami…Calvin”

  1. Thomas Bregulla

    cool picture!

    …and maybe the right opportunity to give a short report.
    little more than an hour ago, I met Kim and Panos on a stop in Athens, before continuing their journez to Greccolandia. For me, it was the first time meeting them in real life – Hi to all burnians from Panos, it will take them several hours more to reach their destination.
    this picture we made just before they went back to the secure area for boarding.
    http://instagram.com/p/TWKQAoiUig/

    what not to love.

  2. pAtrIcIO m.

    As I’m not in Argentina, I sent my mum to the lecture and presentation of a great book of Alejandro Chalskierberg, The Hide Tide. She bought me the book, with a signature in it. :-)

    Fortunately I used to go very often on weekends to the Delta del Paraná on weekends since 1995 (I was 15), far from parties, discos and nite life… Great images of an awesome and unique place in the world:

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=429834133748643&set=a.139888866076506.28370.100001661791664&type=1&theater

    Shine
    P.

  3. Thomas Bregulla

    we already had the discussion about social media platforms making use of their user’s content to finance the platform, and with Instagram’s announcement of changing their TOS and privacy rules, it makes sense to have a deeper look again.

    http://blog.instagram.com/post/38143346554/privacy-and-terms-of-service-changes-on-instagram

    – It already creates buzz:

    http://gawker.com/5969225/instagrams-absurd-new-terms-of-use-agreement-is-already-being-called-its-suicide-note

    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/12/how-to-download-your-instagram-photos-and-kill-your-account/

    http://hyperallergic.com/62187/is-flickrs-new-app-an-instagram-killer/

    on facebook, I have seen some people (e.g. John Vink) already pulled the plug.

    Currently I am in “observation mode” to see what is going on and if the social pressure makes Instagram changing their minds, on the other side with the consequences of “leave and lose” or “accept and we treat your content like our posession”, I consider losing the network.

    What do the burnians think?

  4. Imants

    privacy, internet possessions, text, images etc we gave that up along time ago and there is no going back to what was ……….. most stuff that is posted on the net by fellow citizen is not about long term use. All that information individually is of little value ………. combined is useful and worth a lot. But what individual has the means to gather all that stuff up.

  5. Carlo

    Thomas,

    I’m with you…I will wait a little and see what happens but I’m really considering pulling out….

    ”You agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.'”

    That’s a little too much…

  6. eva

    “You acknowledge that we may not always identify paid services, sponsored content, or commercial communications as such.”

    Doesn’t help either.. basically they can associate you/your name/your picture to whatever they want, without being clear it is not YOU but THEM having made the association.. not really fun.

  8. Jim Powers

    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/1…-mean-for-you/

    “A section of the new terms of service, titled “Rights,” notes that Instagram will also be able to use your photographs and identity in advertisements. “You agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you,” the new terms say. This means that photographs uploaded to Instagram could end up in an advertisement on the service or on Facebook. In addition, someone who doesn’t use Instagram could end up in an advertisement if they have their photograph snapped and shared on the service by a friend. Facebook already runs ads that make use of people’s activity on its site.”

  10. mtomalty

    With those terms, I think you’d have to be an imbecile to continue to use the platform
    if you are a working photographer.

    The minefield that this type of clause facilitates is scary.

    As an example, I go to a DAH exhibit featuring his work. I happily snap with my iPhone
    and I Instagram the shit out of every pic I like and upload.

    What then stops an unwise client of Instagram,etc to then license these DAH images for commercial
    applications bypassing David and Magnum in the process. It’s no longer social media but social licensing.

    Would it happen? Probably not. Could it happen? In the blink of an eye.

    Free is never free.

  11. Imants

    Remember not to post ideas on the net someone could use them for their own gain……..as for the photos the flow will not abate good bad indifferent important unimportant useful useless all get lost in the mix.
    It’s no longer social media but social licensing…………Too much paranoia here and bizarre grief

  13. eva

    Starmatic an option? Instagram pics can be imported.. anybody finds something in their terms if use that kills this as an option?

  14. Carlo

    Interesting article here:

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3780158/instagrams-new-terms-of-service-what-they-really-mean

    They are “listening” ;-)))

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3781860/instagram-on-its-new-tos-its-not-our-intention-to-sell-your-photos

    “Instagram has just responded to the public outcry over its changes to the company’s terms of service today, saying that the company is “listening,” and that “it’s not our intention to sell your photos” — to fix the problem, it will update its terms of service. ”

    “Instagram users own their content.”

  20. mw

    I’m in total agreement with Imants on this one. If you show anything on the internet, anyone who comes across it has the right to use it however they want. If they can sell it, more power to them. And don’t forget that corporations are people too. If a big corporate person wants to take your work and sell it, they’re only exercising their God-given constitutional right. It’s the exact same thing as when we drive by a farmer’s field and decide to pack up all the produce and sell it at the nearest farmer’s market, or to Walmart, whicheverever pays the most. Or if we go into the Apple store and fill up our pockets with IPhones to sell on Craig’s list. Nobody complains about that kind of thing. What’s with all this property shit, anyway? Best to just lay back and think of the billionaires.

  21. mtomalty

    “It’s no longer social media but social licensing…………Too much paranoia here and bizarre grief”

    Hardly. Up until December 1 of this year, my principal stock agency has licensed over $50k for
    unauthorized use of my archive images alone. I am one photographer of hundreds in the agency and they are one
    agency of dozens.
    This figure does not represent any punitive damages as their policy is to try to educate the
    ‘offenders’ and convert them into return clients.
    This figure only represents actions against commercial uses of our images by ad agencies,
    design firms,etc

  24. Paul

    I’ve said it before and it’s probably not a viable idea, but snail mail and a group of online photographer friends sending each other once a month their best photo to each other is just another way. Boring probably compared to the instantaneous speed of Instagram but I bet it would be thoroughly more rewarding than a Jpeg.

  25. Imants

    ……..if you don’t want to embark down the open slather road photographers will have to start paying for posting on the social media sites, after all they are getting free advertising of their product. It has been free up to now but people are investing in these companies just as they do in solar energy companies banks etc, there has to be a return for their investment to keep those sites afloat. Advertising space will never bring in enough money.

  26. Jim Powers

    Paul, like the old drag racing question goes, “Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?”

  27. Thomas Bregulla

    The updated TOS of Instagram sound softer, but actually to me seem having the same goals and consequences, but written in a way to hide the real message.

    with this statement “Instead, you hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you post on or through the Service”, they don’t need to own anything – they can do whatever they like, including giving others the right to show or print the pictures, without further permission asking. This is, however, the same license we give when signed into facebook.

    the updated TOS are here http://instagram.com/about/legal/terms/updated/

    As an alternative service, EyeEm seems to be a little fairer,
    http://www.eyeem.com/terms
    http://www.eyeem.com/privacy
    most importantly, I see nowhere anything like sub-licensing. Please read yourself, maybe I overlooked it.

    you can find me under http://www.eyeem.com/thomasbregulla

Comments are closed.