Digital Downloads and related questions
I Simonius
Registered Users Posts: 1,034 Major grins
I was looking here:
http://www.epuk.org/Blogs/537/cashing-in-on-flickr
and saw this (below) which I wondered whether such considerations had been taken into account with the wording of the licences for DD on SM?
"Secondly, although the system is specifically designed to enable Flickr contributors to license stock images, it’s obvious that Fou and Co haven’t the faintest idea what that entails in a professional sense. Which is why although FlickrCash offers six licensing templates, they are all Creative Commons licenses, a format that is very poorly suited to licensing images. Not only poorly suited, but so widely misunderstood that recently Thomas Hawke, CEO of Zooomr and one of the prime proponents of Creative Commons licensing for photography, made a public fool of himself when Forbes.com misused one of his images and it transpired that Hawke himself did not understand the parameters of Creative Commons licensing in an editorial context."
http://www.epuk.org/Blogs/537/cashing-in-on-flickr
and saw this (below) which I wondered whether such considerations had been taken into account with the wording of the licences for DD on SM?
"Secondly, although the system is specifically designed to enable Flickr contributors to license stock images, it’s obvious that Fou and Co haven’t the faintest idea what that entails in a professional sense. Which is why although FlickrCash offers six licensing templates, they are all Creative Commons licenses, a format that is very poorly suited to licensing images. Not only poorly suited, but so widely misunderstood that recently Thomas Hawke, CEO of Zooomr and one of the prime proponents of Creative Commons licensing for photography, made a public fool of himself when Forbes.com misused one of his images and it transpired that Hawke himself did not understand the parameters of Creative Commons licensing in an editorial context."
Veni-Vidi-Snappii
...pics..
...pics..
0