Comments on: Pinterest: Is It A Facebook Or A Grokster?

By: chuckpjones

chuckpjones — Wed, 02 May 2012 15:55:30 +0000

For the second time today, all I have to say is when content providers are paid nothing for their work, their work soon becomes exactly what they are paid – worthless!

By: Mitch Labuda

Mitch Labuda — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:16:30 +0000

”is also a live link back into the image owner’s site”

Not always. There are links to Google images and to cloud addresses and not always back to the source.

By: Mitch Labuda

Mitch Labuda — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:15:33 +0000

Users can flag content? The copyright holder is required to file a DMCA complaint and not a user of the site, to take down images. This is on the DMCA link on Pinterest.

By: Debbie Flanigan

Debbie Flanigan — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 03:47:28 +0000

Thanks so much for your comment and excellent article in hubpages! I would like to know as a professional photographer, with Pinterest’s current ToS, how exactly (or even if) I could get on this new marketing bandwagon, but still retain all rights to my work. I know of the use of the ‘embed’ button and how images are being used without compensation on monetized blogs, websites, storefronts, etc. I also know that it, more often than not, takes more than the often printed ’1 or 2′ clicks to actually get to the site of the image owner to possibly make a purchase. I would love to read an article (that you might write) about how photographer’s (speaking of wildlife and nature) could also safely enjoy success on Pinterest, as do the product manufacturer’s. For them, it’s easy as the user has to go to that store, or order the item online to receive their product (after they’ve made the purchase), but our images ARE our product. Once pinned, they have our product to use as they choose. Or is it a site you’d recommend to totally stay away from right now? Currently I am blocking my website’s images from pinning. I keep reading about all the page views and traffic being driven to sites by Pinterest, but n one is mentioning ‘dollars spent’. Web / social marketing is so time consuming now, that I would like to know if the new site is generating real sales.
You are a bright light of sanity in all of the Pinterest hype. Thanks for guarding our copyrights! We’re listening to you!

By: ddeloss4

ddeloss4 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 04:24:37 +0000

Perhaps paying out royalties is the way to go. Pinterest should be great exposure for photographers but there is definitely a gray area of “fair use.” In the end, money talks and if that’s what it takes for Pinterest to continue growing then so be it.

By: John Kirwan-Taylor

John Kirwan-Taylor — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:51:28 +0000

… but that assumes the original poster of the content which has been pinned is the actual copyright holder. That is not always the case, especially since a lot of images seem to be coming from Tumblr (often famous images without attribution). So there isn’t necessarily a way of generating revenue or traffic for the actual owner. What you would need to do is a have a new type of image file embedded with some form of DRM code/a tag that tracks back to the ultimate source (I have no idea if such a thing exists) and then only allow those type of files on the site (to preclude scans etc.).

By: Sean Locke

Sean Locke — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:36:40 +0000

The significance, imo, is that this is an entertainment site that makes money off of infringed works, not an indexing site that makes money off its service of a searchable link database with thumbnails.

By: Jeff Roberts

Jeff Roberts — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:21:17 +0000

Thanks, everyone, for the intelligent and probing comments. These forums can degenerate into shouting matches so it was terrific to see such a high level of discussions that helps to push the debate forward.

By: Sarah Dessen

Sarah Dessen — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:48:10 +0000

I haven’t tried Pinterest yet. But, recently, I read a post about Pinterest. I found Pinterest interesting and something new to try. However, we should not just go by the looks. Probably most users are doing that, which might have added to its huge popularity within such a short period of time. Now I know that there are certain issues that Pinterest needs to sort out to be the next Facebook. Firstly, it has to make a niche of its own when other giants like Facebook, Twitter, and StumbleUpon are ruling the roost. Thanks Jeff for this informative post.

By: QuentinUK

QuentinUK — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:28:42 +0000

There is advertising but there is never a need for an image user to pay to use an image. So advertising will just lead to more people using your images for free. If Pinterest are allowed to do this then what is to stop all other websites doing it as well? No one will have to pay to use images at all. I have checked the Pinterest website and looked at the code behind it, they use the nofollow keyword which means Google will not use the link in it's page ranking.