4 ms·

There are real photographers enforcing their copyright, but there are also trolls. The trolls are pushing a few Fotos they made to Wikipedia and “free Foto”-sit

by growt 3y ago

There are real photographers enforcing their copyright, but there are also trolls. The trolls are pushing a few Fotos they made to Wikipedia and “free Foto”-sites with missing terms. Then they search for people who stole their images and extract money. Sure the people who used the images are in the wrong legally, but the trolls actually wanted their images to be stolen. Also, for the trolls, this is the only kind of revenue they get. Those images would never be legally bought or licensed anyway

krisoft 3y ago
> Those images would never be legally bought or licensed anyway Why? If they are good enough that people choose to use them in their publications then why do you assert this?
- efaref 3y ago
  We only know that they're good enough to be used for free, so all we can assert that their current value is $0.
  - Tomte 3y ago
    That the lower floor of the commercial value is zero.
VBprogrammer 3y ago
> Then they search for people who stole their images and extract money. I think part of this problem is that the assumed value of an image is practically 0. Conversely any YouTuber from some rural backwater will make sure there is no copyright music playing in the background of anything they intend to release because they know that it has non-0 value. The reason this changed is because people became more collectively aware of the consequences. The long term consequences are that people will ensure they have the appropriate permissions before using a photo. Even if this means paying a nearly negligible amount for access to collections of millions of photos like happens with music now.