3 ms·

Some of that, but Getty also repackages images with licenses that allow it. And sometimes then acts like it "owns" those images by harassing others that use th

by tyingq 4y ago

Some of that, but Getty also repackages images with licenses that allow it. And sometimes then acts like it "owns" those images by harassing others that use the same original source, including the original copyright owner. That's not especially relevant to the article, but helpful to understand a lot of what's there isn't their IP to manage.

VanTheBrand 4y ago
That’s the minority of their images and also if it’s the version from their server with their watermark on it, it actually is their IP to manage. So as you said it’s not especially relevant and it’s very clear stability didn’t limit its scraping of Getty to these kinds of images. Getty in other instances being jerks doesn’t make them wrong here.
- tyingq 4y ago
  >That’s the minority of their images It's difficult to find any source that would prove or disprove that. I can find references that they changed 35 million images to "royalty free" in 2014. The examples I can find of those are things like this: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/jpg/_73409443_1e3b6fe6-c85b-4b52-96a9-3b7d6e547ef5.jpg https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/mcs/media/images/73409000/... Which appears to be a public domain image. Or this $499 image from Getty: https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burroughs-sharecropper-by-walker-evans-news-photo/544162314 https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/floyd-burrough... Free from the Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ https://www.loc.gov/item/00651772/ (including the 50MB tiff that appears to be the highest resolution avaialable)