What is Digg?118 Comments
- scrubadub, on 10/12/2007, -4/+50goatse anyone?
- manfrin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31Yahoo owns Flickr, and it is certainly not against Flickr's TOS to use the photos on the site.
Read the terms again. They're legally allowed to do this. - peregrine, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24They own flickr. Flickr owns your pictures. Yahoo owns your pictures.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14peregrine has it ;)
Yahoo owns flickr. Flickr has images that anyone can access.
Yahoo simply has a page linking to flickr, with photos with a Wii tag. Its non-commerical and they are not "stealing" anything.
What I was expecting was Yahoo had selected certain photos and were using them, this is simply a flickr integration. Expect to see it more. - cwac5, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13@tizz66
Contracts are typically legally binding. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13So begins the wave of anti-Yahoo articles. Oh man I can't wait especially how great the website was during the anti PS3 article wave. (Sarcasm)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11The only anti publicity they are getting is the 1% of the population that goes to this website and believes all its babble.
- FackBlog, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9?
Last time I checked Yahoo owned flickr, somehow I think a quick read of the ToS will make you all feel a bit silly - flyzipper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8 From the Flickr API Terms of Use:
Comply with any requirements or restrictions imposed on usage of the photos by their respective owners. Remember, Flickr doesn't own the images - Flickr users do. Although the Flickr APIs can be used to provide you with access to Flickr user photos, neither Flickr's provision of the Flickr APIs to you nor your use of the Flickr APIs override the photo owners' requirements and restrictions, which may include "all rights reserved" notices (attached to each photo by default when uploaded to Flickr), Creative Commons licenses or other terms and conditions that may be agreed upon between you and the owners. In ALL cases, you are solely responsible for making use of Flickr photos in compliance with the photo owners' requirements or restrictions. If you use Flickr photos for a commercial purpose, the photos must be marked with a Creative Commons license that allows for such use, unless otherwise agreed upon between you and the owner.
(executive summary: neither flickr nor Yahoo own the photos that are hosted on Flickr - the photographer does) - h2d2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10So any Tom or Dick can put flickr images on their homepages via widgets to the tens of AJAX start pages out there... but Yahoo!, the company that owns flickr, can't do it...
- Anteros, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I don't see what the big deal is, they are only displaying thumbnails that each link back to a flickr page.
- Quiplash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Flickr users are already fighting back by marking new, critical photos CC NonCommercial or All Rights Reserved, tagging them with "wii" and uploading them.
So now a new and slightly different batch of photos is being displayed with the Wii advertising--photos I'm sure Yahoo! did NOT have in mind ;-)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/58451469@N00/375960242 - perezd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8wow today is a bad publicity day for flickr.
- mixmastabob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yea this story is pretty lame. The link goes to your photo. Its just a link people...
- jardel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9let's tag all your photostream with "wii" tag, then you'll have all your photos there,
I'll do that if the staff doesn't make a good move. - loupiote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yahoo acknowledges Wii mistake with regards to copyrights:
http://www.flickr.com/forums/help/32752/165536/ - ericmcgovern, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6You mean Yahoo stole a picture from Yahoo..
You are outrageously retarded
Now give me that 2 minutes back of my life you wasted whining like a 3 year old. - eddypcj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I saw "We found 48,832 photos matching wii" when I did a search on Flickr.
This will be interesting. Please add "wii" to all your photos. We can make a strong point this way. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5tizz66 is abosutely right. If you read any of the Digg submissions regarding the Pirate Bay, the RIAA, the MPAA etc, you will find the vast majority of the Digg users commenting there feel that downloading and distributing other people's work is not only acceptable, but also part of a people's revolution against copyright laws. Anyone who takes an opposing position can expect to be dugg down into oblivion. I have admiration for users like geekee, who despite being exponentially outnumbered by piracy advocates, continues to be an often-lone voice in support of the artists, musicians and producers who are affected when their creations are stolen.
The truth is, anyone who pirates movies and music without qualm, but feels this yahoo flickr story is an outrage, is a hyppocrite. I just hope it enlightens a few people as to how it feels to have their work freely distributed without permission or hope of financial compensation. In short, it sucks.
tizz66: I dugg you up man, though I suspect you won't be able to see it after the wave of digg downs that are probably on their way. - saleem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@tizz66
people don't make contracts because they're fun to draft and read. they make em cuz you can sue someone if they break it. - tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9I'm not saying everyone does, I am saying most do - and you're kidding yourself if you don't think that most people on the net have pirated something. Especially those people bitching here on digg, which is a pirating hot house (seriously, try saying something anti-pirating and see if you get dugg up).
I'm not saying it's OK for companies to steal back, I'm saying it's hypocritical for everyone to start bitching about it when a huge proportion of the bitchers steal stuff EVERY SINGLE DAY. - Quiplash, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9This is a growing public relations disaster for Yahoo!/Flickr. Many Flickr users are angry over the latest announcements from Flickr regarding new user limits and the requirement to get a Yahoo! account (all pre-merger accounts up until now did not have to do so). But I consider this to be much worse.
- andreas1999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3thanks tizz and actorboy! finally someone dares to say it and you're not even being dugg down.. that much! :)
- greymarketbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Can someone please add: Bury> Complete IDIOT
and have that tag automatically block them simultaneously! - loupiote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3wow, yes, i saw some anti-wii photos appearing, so there is clearly no human moderation at all in this banner.
- tizz66, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Thanks actorboy, glad I'm not the only one that sees it.
- david76, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5According to the TOS, Yahoo is completely within their rights to use your photos however they please. Maybe those who are complaining should read the TOS before claiming their rights have been violated.
http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/utos-173.html
Yahoo! Terms of Service:
9. CONTENT SUBMITTED OR MADE AVAILABLE FOR INCLUSION ON THE SERVICE
Yahoo! does not claim ownership of Content you submit or make available for inclusion on the Service. However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:
With respect to Content other than photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service other than Yahoo! Groups, the perpetual, irrevocable and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. - metlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's the intent.
There is a fine line between a utility (i.e. google images) and an advertisement (i.e. using flickr images). - kidjay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6bottom line is: yahoo is getting ad revenue by displaying our photos...which some of us (pro account holders) pay a yearly fee to put online.
right...that's two strikes in two days. zoomr, here we come? - zilch321, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Maybe if you didn't want your photos on display for everyone to see you wouldn't have stuck them on a community viewable and linkable website. Gosh whats next, someone will post a link to a news story for other people to see and call it stealing. Sound familiar? Unreal...
- zenatek, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Wow - What an overreaction.
1)Flickr users post pictures on Flickr to share...
2)Yahoo owns Flickr....
3)Yahoo helps more people who are interested in the content of your picture (the wii) see your picture by posting a tiny thumbnail that links back to the picture You posted on Flickr...
4)Flickr user shares photo to more people...
WTF guys, if you are going after Yahoo for linking to the pictures you posted to be shared...(thats the point of Flickr), better go after Google image search too. - froman98, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5This is the silliest thing I've ever heard of. BURIED.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5yeah, what manfrin said.
reported as inaccurate. - consonance, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Am I the only one who doesn't see what the big deal is? Yahoo! is displaying a gallery, with "flickr" displayed clearly in the middle of the page. It's not like Yahoo! is claiming that the photos don't belong to the users. Since when is it a crime to show photos sharing the same tag and crediting Flickr?
- metlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Some of us are Pro users. The problem is not having to login using Yahoo! The problem is the fact that:
a. Yahoo! has a nasty habit of messing up user accounts and emails and people do not want their years worth of photographs to be lost.
b. If you have an existing Flickr account associated with your Yahoo! id, then you will have to delete one of the accounts or create a new one.
c. Flickr and Yahoo! have done something that is clearly distasteful to the original community that helped Flickr right from the beginning.
d. When we signed up, Flickr wasn't a part of Yahoo! Now that they are doesn't mean they can do as they please. A lot of people are going to be demanding refunds and if that does not happen, there will be class action lawsuits because of the change in the original agreement that you signed up for before Flickr was acquired by Yahoo!
I could go on and on, but these sum up the reason I am pissed. - iluvhatemail, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3caught this: http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=375990512&size=o
- VeganG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What the....
Is OUTRAGEOUS the new AWESOME? - sketchstudios, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3from the flickr.com forum:
STAFF UPDATE: "Update! I have spoken with the team working on wii.yahoo.com and they are going to be changing the site to only use images with appropriately licensed Creative Commons photos effective very soon. " -- mroth
and just on a side note, if my picture *i* took was on the front page of wii.yahoo.com I'd actually feel good and honored, geez. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Funny how Yahoo can't do this but everyone on the web can and no one will complain, here is another example:
http://digg.com/tech_news/Your_Flash_Games_Stolen_and_Sold - Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3*sigh* Who dugg this guy down? Finally some good info about this:
"Update! I have spoken with the team working on wii.yahoo.com and they are going to be changing the site to only use images with appropriately licensed Creative Commons photos effective very soon. "
That makes a whole lot of sense and I kind of assumed they had done it before. - bouche, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4anyone can look at theses photos by typing in the tag 'Wii'.
How is this OUTRAGEOUS? Click on the photo and you end up at the users gallery. If you've made your photos public, they are...well PUBLIC. - stevetheman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://www.flickr.com/photos/39388095@N00/375946667 this hit the front page of the yahoo wii thing!
- lsatkins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What's the big deal? I would think most people would be happy that their picture went to a yahoo front page...it's probably more traffic for their picture then they'd ever see with just having it on flickr. Plus it says photos tagged with 'wii' Flickr.
- agnoster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Looks like they're only using CC-licensed photos, too. Clicked through a bunch, haven't seen a single one that was copyright (which is the default, right)? And isn't Creative Commons to promote sharing and fair use?
So in other words they're only using public, Creative Commons-licensed photo thumbnails that link back to the original on a non-commercial website. What's the problem here? - xelloss, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3This is really lame, they are just linking everyones photos on the other site don't you want people to see you photos? Its like Free advertisement. Its like google cache/image , but no one has issues with that.
- shm0edawg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6yeah i'm definitely burying this as inaccurate. What are they stealing again? Oh, they're stealing from themselves, that's right. SHAME ON THEM.
From TOS:
The Flickr service makes it possible to post images hosted on Flickr to outside websites. This use is accepted (and even encouraged!). However, pages on other websites which display images hosted on flickr.com must provide a link back to Flickr from each photo to its photo page on Flickr.
Seems cool to me? - drjekelmrhyde, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Wait Yahoo owns Flickr RIGHT
- sleepykit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2*echo* Yahoo owns Flickr. What more right do they need to do this? I can't imagine them asking each user for written permission in the case of completely open pictures. This is little more than a flickr query most likely... Buried...
- loupiote, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5i also consider this copyright violation by yahoo to be a much more serious issue than the flickr login ID merger.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is