<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It&#8217;s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:09:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Tribby</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-105971</link>
		<dc:creator>David Tribby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-105971</guid>
		<description>Thank you Tom, I think you understand where I&#039;m coming from :)

Everyblock.com continued to use my image on another page even after they removed the first one. It took several more emails before it was removed. I have little doubt my images will show up in the future. I totally disagree with the sites policy and usage, it needs to be looked into.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Tom, I think you understand where I&#8217;m coming from <img src='http://thomashawk.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Everyblock.com continued to use my image on another page even after they removed the first one. It took several more emails before it was removed. I have little doubt my images will show up in the future. I totally disagree with the sites policy and usage, it needs to be looked into.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-93111</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:54:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-93111</guid>
		<description>@Doug:
I think you(and the owners of the everyblock site) need
to go back and study fair use. The use of a thumbnail on a
commercial site is not fair use. Fair use has a set
of criteria that it must meet. This includes the purpose
for which the use was made, the nature of the copyrighted
work, amount and effect on value.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Doug:<br />
I think you(and the owners of the everyblock site) need<br />
to go back and study fair use. The use of a thumbnail on a<br />
commercial site is not fair use. Fair use has a set<br />
of criteria that it must meet. This includes the purpose<br />
for which the use was made, the nature of the copyrighted<br />
work, amount and effect on value.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lifewave Digest for 10:22am &#8211; lifewave.silverton.palo-alto.ca.us</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-92717</link>
		<dc:creator>Lifewave Digest for 10:22am &#8211; lifewave.silverton.palo-alto.ca.us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-92717</guid>
		<description>[...] Shared So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Shared So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-91788</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:42:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-91788</guid>
		<description>&quot;and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.” doesn’t change the fact that they are illegally grabbing images.&quot;

Dude, they just wrote that they were using it under &quot;fair use&quot;. What part of &quot;fair use&quot; do you not understand?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.” doesn’t change the fact that they are illegally grabbing images.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dude, they just wrote that they were using it under &#8220;fair use&#8221;. What part of &#8220;fair use&#8221; do you not understand?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Tribby</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-91562</link>
		<dc:creator>David Tribby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 04:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-91562</guid>
		<description>I recently had a similar situation with the website http://www.everyblock.com/ owned and operated by MSNBC. 

They have a system that rips images from Flickr regardless of copyright and licensing and then try to claim &quot;Fair Use&quot;.

-----------------------------------------------------------
After I found a photograph of mine used without permission I sent the following email:

The following photograph of mine was used without permission and is in breach of my copyright and Flickr community guidelines. &quot;Just because an image is set to &quot;public view&quot; doesn&#039;t mean it&#039;s free to use on 3rd party sites (even when using a link back). You are a for-profit site and should know better. The copyright is clearly displayed in two different places on the page (one being directly below) and also on the image itself. The following image must be removed within 24hrs or result in legal action..

my image:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dtribby/3850455519/

infringed usage:
http://chicago.everyblock.com/locations/zipcodes/60617/

EveryBlock&#039;s policy of using Flickr &quot;public photos&quot; is heavily flawed. Only public photos whose authors give permission or are listed under certain &quot;creative commons license&quot; can be used on 3rd party sites.

If this is not quickly taken care of I will also be filing with yahoo&#039;s copyright office as your usage breaks Yahoo&#039;s &quot;Copyright and Intellectual Property Policy&quot;.


-David Tribby Photography


----------------------------------------------------------------
Their response:

Hi there,

Sorry for causing you concern! On EveryBlock, we link to Flickr photos on a neighborhood level, so visitors to our site can view photos (and
a whole bunch of other stuff) near them. We use the small Flickr thumbnails under the doctrine of fair use -- and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.

Still, we respect your wishes. We&#039;ve removed the photo you mentioned, and we&#039;ve made a note in our system not to link to any of your photos from our site ever again.

By the way, your photos were made available to us because your Flickr account allows third-party sites to access them. You might consider following the steps on this page -- http://chicago.everyblock.com/photos/about/ -- to ensure that no other third-party sites use your photos. As I said, EveryBlock won&#039;t display your photos anymore, but you might want to take the extra precaution outlined in that link to ban other sites from using your photos, too. Hope this helps.

Have a good one,

Adrian

--
Adrian Holovaty
EveryBlock.com


-------------------------------------------------------------

The defense that they &quot;link to Flickr photos on a neighborhood level&quot; and &quot;We use the small Flickr thumbnails under the doctrine of fair use -- and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.&quot; doesn&#039;t change the fact that they are illegally grabbing images. A flawed system is no excuse! and it doesn&#039;t matter what size you used. Copyright isn&#039;t based off size!
I don&#039;t have to block third-party access to the API. They have to use the API responsibly!

They removed my image but have not changed their policy and continue to use copyrighted (all rights reserved) images.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently had a similar situation with the website <a href="http://www.everyblock.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.everyblock.com/</a> owned and operated by MSNBC. </p>
<p>They have a system that rips images from Flickr regardless of copyright and licensing and then try to claim &#8220;Fair Use&#8221;.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;<br />
After I found a photograph of mine used without permission I sent the following email:</p>
<p>The following photograph of mine was used without permission and is in breach of my copyright and Flickr community guidelines. &#8220;Just because an image is set to &#8220;public view&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mean it&#8217;s free to use on 3rd party sites (even when using a link back). You are a for-profit site and should know better. The copyright is clearly displayed in two different places on the page (one being directly below) and also on the image itself. The following image must be removed within 24hrs or result in legal action..</p>
<p>my image:<br />
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dtribby/3850455519/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/photos/dtribby/3850455519/</a></p>
<p>infringed usage:<br />
<a href="http://chicago.everyblock.com/locations/zipcodes/60617/" rel="nofollow">http://chicago.everyblock.com/locations/zipcodes/60617/</a></p>
<p>EveryBlock&#8217;s policy of using Flickr &#8220;public photos&#8221; is heavily flawed. Only public photos whose authors give permission or are listed under certain &#8220;creative commons license&#8221; can be used on 3rd party sites.</p>
<p>If this is not quickly taken care of I will also be filing with yahoo&#8217;s copyright office as your usage breaks Yahoo&#8217;s &#8220;Copyright and Intellectual Property Policy&#8221;.</p>
<p>-David Tribby Photography</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br />
Their response:</p>
<p>Hi there,</p>
<p>Sorry for causing you concern! On EveryBlock, we link to Flickr photos on a neighborhood level, so visitors to our site can view photos (and<br />
a whole bunch of other stuff) near them. We use the small Flickr thumbnails under the doctrine of fair use &#8212; and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.</p>
<p>Still, we respect your wishes. We&#8217;ve removed the photo you mentioned, and we&#8217;ve made a note in our system not to link to any of your photos from our site ever again.</p>
<p>By the way, your photos were made available to us because your Flickr account allows third-party sites to access them. You might consider following the steps on this page &#8212; <a href="http://chicago.everyblock.com/photos/about/" rel="nofollow">http://chicago.everyblock.com/photos/about/</a> &#8212; to ensure that no other third-party sites use your photos. As I said, EveryBlock won&#8217;t display your photos anymore, but you might want to take the extra precaution outlined in that link to ban other sites from using your photos, too. Hope this helps.</p>
<p>Have a good one,</p>
<p>Adrian</p>
<p>&#8211;<br />
Adrian Holovaty<br />
EveryBlock.com</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>The defense that they &#8220;link to Flickr photos on a neighborhood level&#8221; and &#8220;We use the small Flickr thumbnails under the doctrine of fair use &#8212; and do not publish the full-sized photos, or even medium-sized thumbnails.&#8221; doesn&#8217;t change the fact that they are illegally grabbing images. A flawed system is no excuse! and it doesn&#8217;t matter what size you used. Copyright isn&#8217;t based off size!<br />
I don&#8217;t have to block third-party access to the API. They have to use the API responsibly!</p>
<p>They removed my image but have not changed their policy and continue to use copyrighted (all rights reserved) images.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Photography Links &#8211; September 4, 2009 &#171; Photo Notes: Photography by Patty Hankins and Bill Lawrence</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-91134</link>
		<dc:creator>Photography Links &#8211; September 4, 2009 &#171; Photo Notes: Photography by Patty Hankins and Bill Lawrence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 09:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-91134</guid>
		<description>[...] Thomas Hawk has So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It&#8217;s Ok To Rip Copyrighted Photos from Flickr [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Thomas Hawk has So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It&#8217;s Ok To Rip Copyrighted Photos from Flickr [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: StevieB&#8217;s Shared Items &#8211; September 1, 2009 at Lost in Cyberspace</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-89821</link>
		<dc:creator>StevieB&#8217;s Shared Items &#8211; September 1, 2009 at Lost in Cyberspace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:02:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-89821</guid>
		<description>[...] So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?August 31, 2009 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?August 31, 2009 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-89278</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:19:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-89278</guid>
		<description>One of the major reasons I and some of my colleagues have  left Flickr - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED images shouldn&#039;t be available on the Flickr API, or at the very least should have a setting to Opt-In to the API.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the major reasons I and some of my colleagues have  left Flickr &#8211; ALL RIGHTS RESERVED images shouldn&#8217;t be available on the Flickr API, or at the very least should have a setting to Opt-In to the API.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-89212</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-89212</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve always felt that &quot;all rights reserved&quot; images should never be available through the Flickr API, especially if you have the &quot;Who can download your stuff&quot; privacy option set to anything but &quot;anyone&quot;.  The current API is too easy for a client to abuse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve always felt that &#8220;all rights reserved&#8221; images should never be available through the Flickr API, especially if you have the &#8220;Who can download your stuff&#8221; privacy option set to anything but &#8220;anyone&#8221;.  The current API is too easy for a client to abuse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Digital Photography Live &#187; So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?</title>
		<link>http://thomashawk.com/2009/08/so-the-los-angeles-times-thinks-its-ok-to-rip-copyrighted-photos-from-flickr.html/comment-page-1#comment-89206</link>
		<dc:creator>Digital Photography Live &#187; So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thomashawk.com/?p=6759#comment-89206</guid>
		<description>[...] more: So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?    Share this on del.icio.usDigg this!Post this on DiigoShare this on RedditBuzz up!Stumble upon [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] more: So the Los Angeles Times Thinks It’s OK to Rip Copyrighted Photos From Flickr?    Share this on del.icio.usDigg this!Post this on DiigoShare this on RedditBuzz up!Stumble upon [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

