3 ms·
It's completely and utterly irrelevant that it's you. I took the picture, it's MY picture. I have thousands of physical pictures captured on 35mm film. I have n
by ktsmith 15y ago
It's completely and utterly irrelevant that it's you. I took the picture, it's MY picture. I have thousands of physical pictures captured on 35mm film. I have names and dates written on them, should I have to give a copy of all of those pictures to the people that are in them simply because I put their name on the back? Should I have to give them a copy because I wrote their URL on the back? The additional meta data of the link to your profile is not ANY greater than a simple label so long as that picture is private.
- jahmed 15y agoBut it isn't irrelevant, I have a vested interest in the picture from the fact that I'm in the picture. Photos of me are extremely valuable to me and I would think most people have that opinion but maybe I'm wrong. This 'force sharing' leads to a Pareto improvement in both the google+ network and society. I honestly do not understand the situation where sharing a picture of me with me makes it less valuable for you. In the case of physical photos, no I dont think you need to give everyone a copy because that would take effort on your part. Sharing on google+ is costless.