"Twitpic, Flickr And Other Photo-Sharing Sites Can Sell Your Images If They Want"

[johannielscom]

Flickr just responded to this:
http://blog.flickr.net/en/2011/05/13/at-flickr-your-photos-are-always-yours/
I've used flickr for five years or so. They seem like they have their heads on mostly straight compared with everyone else.

Until Flickr gets sold to that particular someone else that is, ofcourse.

Guess I'll be scrapping my account there in the next couple of months, have some work to do on my rights management anyway.

I wonder, does this 'being allowed to sell' thing also apply to images that used to be on their servers and got deleted since? I reckon it would, right?

 

[user237428934]

Until Flickr gets sold to that particular someone else that is, ofcourse.

Guess I'll be scrapping my account there in the next couple of months, have some work to do on my rights management anyway.

I wonder, does this 'being allowed to sell' thing also apply to images that used to be on their servers and got deleted since? I reckon it would, right?

Are you talking about flickr in your last sentence? They are not allowed to sell so who are you talking about?

 

[umcelinho]

anyone with a minimum photoshop skill can isolate a watermark and neutralise it, or, well, just crop it off depending on the position. also, looking at photos with watermarks is pretty boring. it's not rare to see photos around which clearly have been rescaled to fit a larger area than they should, not giving a damn about resolution. so, to me - someone who does not make a living out of photographs-, there is no point in posting tiny images with watermarks, as one could fix it fast if they wanted to really use the shot.