What is Digg?62 Comments
- threepio, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33Consumerist - holding others accountable while dodging any accountability ourselves.
Seriously, this is *****. Give credit where it's due. Consumerist has just shot what little credibility they had. - popsumer, on 10/12/2007, -10/+31I'm sorry. All old posts temporarily down are back up again. Here's our apology post:
We are a jerkface.
We've been using Flickr photos, but haven't been giving people linkbacks or attribution. Understandably, this recklessness has angered many in the Flickr community. For this, we are sorry.
In previous posts, we expressed cavalier disregard for copyright with regards to Flickr. These comments were infantile and we regret them.
We have felt that the best catalogers of commercial life are the consumers themselves. By illustrating our posts with the highest quality photos we can find, we can better draw a larger audience, some of whom will contributed tips and information, increasing the depth and breadth of knowledge we're able to share with our readership.
How about this:
• We will properly use Creative Commons search to find any and all Flickr pictures that we may use.
• All Flickr pictures will get attribution in the form of their Flickr user name. That name will get linked back to the source image on Flickr.
• If anyone doesn't like us using their picture, they can email us at tips@consumerist.com, and we'll take them down or change the credit. This has always been our policy.
• If you would like to submit photos for use on The Consumerist and gain exposure through linklove, join our Flickr group and add photos to the pool.
Once again, we are sorry. We welcome feedback on this policy from Flickr users, admins, and the internet at large in the comments or tips@consumerist.com. You can ask at that email address for a comments invite as well. — BEN POPKEN - loginname, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18SAME THING HAPPENED TO ME!
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=consumerist&w=46062480%40N00
I had to write them to let them know that they used my photo without my permission! They finally gave me credit though for my photo. - vandyll, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15One apologetic post after months of them saying "We will do as we want with the photos we steal"? No, they (specifically Ben) needs to get all the credit he deserves from this screw-up.
- vandyll, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Their attitude regarding the admitted theft of other peoples photography really destroys any credibility that they may have had. Very poor showing for consumerist.
- noreturn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I guess what this means is that they wouldn't mind if I, say, took their writing and reposted it to my blog without crediting them...
- kilofox, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20I am constantly amazed at diggers... its ok to download music without permission, yet you all get your panties in a bunch if someone takes a photo.
Of course many of you will say "Its ok because I am not "profiting" from it". Semanics or rationalizing doesnt make it legal or right.
It would appear many of you are for copyright law only if it can be used to "stick it to the man"... the hyprocrisy amazes me. - tinfoil, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I am pleased that Ben has apologized, but it has come far to late. I have to say I am disappointed in Ben. He talks the talk, but he can't walk the walk, apparently. The Consumerist is an excellent site with some very good resources, but the respect I had for Ben has fallen through the floor.
As a content producer who has been with Creative Commons since close to day 1, I'm very kean on issues such as this and have had to deal with people nicking my content without the proper attributions. - loginname, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Not sure why I got dug down, this seems pretty relevent, being that the EXACT same thing happened to me and my Flickr photos by the exact same website.
I even have screenshots of the consumerist's website with my photo on it, and a link to the original pic they used. Checkout my link above...
Here is a direct link to the article that they used my photo in.
http://www.consumerist.com/consumer/wii/best-buy-is-hiding-the-wii-217097.php - mulling, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13"We are a jerkface."
Damn it, how are we supposed to have a proper flameout if you're being all apologetic! Get some backbone, man! - agdtinman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10They've put it back up: http://consumerist.com/consumer/flickr/look-at-our-flickr-faves-236463.php
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9While I agree that most digg users are hypocritical, the difference is that Consumerist has a high and mighty atittude when it comes to OTHER companies' "evil doings" and is very quick to slander other companies that they FEEL are doing wrong even when they are often shown to be doing nothing wrng at all. So when they do something so blatantly wrong, thsey should absolutely be called on it.
gabriels...to answer your first question...for the most part...YES. Very few exceptions.
threepio...so, then, you would also be pissed at websites that make it easier to steal MP3s and movies...becuase htey make profits off hteir sites through ad revenue.
Gotcha. - M3ntok, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I have to agree with fatdog789 a little here.
I like The Consumerist, I read it on a pretty much daily basis. But there is a whole lot of whiney consumer BS on there.
It's one thing to complain about a situation where you've clearly been treated unfairly, there's nothing wrong with that. But this "I'm the customer and I'm always right" attitude of entitlement is ridiculous, and is pretty prevalent.
If you didn't read the contract or agreement terms before signing up for something or making a purchase, you have no right to get all huffy when those conditions are actually enforced. If that contract is breached, fine, make a stink, that's your right. But if there's a line in that legal document that says "We reserve the right to bill you $1000 for no good reason whenever we damn well feel like it", tough *****, that's not their problem. Those documents are there for a reason, whether you choose to acknowledge them or not.
Also, OH GOD THE IRONY IS DELICIOUS. - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I'm not aware of any people at Gawker Media with any ounce of credibility or a demonstrative record of good faith.
Gawker Media? More like Garbage Media. - agdtinman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12It's pretty amusing that consumerist.com has now deleted the post heralding their awesome photo stealing skillz.
- threepio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9It's interesting - if a retail organization were ever to make an apology in this fashion I imagine some sort of trumpets and much mocking from the populace would be involved.
Enjoy your 15 minutes of shame Ben. Now you know what it's like to be the real person on the other end of the vitriol - hopefully there's a lesson here about characterizing an entire organization by the actions of one person. - smokeygo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Anyone have a link to the text for the deleted bragging post? I'm really curious to see it now... especially after I've read some of the editor (Ben Popken) comments.
This one below basically says: Respecting photographer's rights is more trouble than it's worth.
http://consumerist.com/consumer/airlines/emirates-airlines-oks-cellphones-inflight-223720.php#c768370
"Credit is more [trouble] than its worth because then we would have to deal with people bitching all day that we didn't spell their name correctly, or they want their name and not their Flickr ID and so on and so forth... when my time is better spent looking for the next post to write. The next post that will save you time or money, or reveal some corporate skulduggery or whatnot. What is the greater good? To use the best photo possible to illustrate the post and move on!" - spiderland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Most of the stuff submitted here from consumerist.com is just paraphrase/click-through posts. Guess they're struggling for original content. Whatever happened to actual reporting and actual research these days?
- GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Kind of broad swipe isn't it? Are digg users a unanimous programmable robot?
Maybe you have some specific digg users with duplicitious remarks you can quote. - threepio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Tell you what, the next time I download a song and use it to promote my somewhat content-devoid anti-corporate blog, I'll give credit where it's due. Would that make you happy?
There's a vast difference between downloading something for private, non-commercial use and stealing IP in order to profit from it. Essentially - if you're getting bucks in for someones work you ought to be tossing some bucks back their way. - fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Now that you've apologized for the Flickr crap, how about apologizing for the loads of inaccurate, sensationalist ***** you put up on your website?
Most of consumerist is people bitching about getting screwed, when they didn't even bother to read their goddamn contract, or don't have a clue about the constraints of the technology or hardware, etc.
It's like...Fox News for consumers. (That's not a compliment). - pinetree, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7That only works if they are loading your image off of your server (i.e. stealing your bandwidth). Apparently, Consumerist is copying the images onto its own server. Any changes the photographers make aren't going to impact the copies that have already been made.
- madaecnerwal, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7http://www.flickr.com/forums/help/33525/
- chrisk9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6In case they delete it again, here is the Consumerist page in question:
http://consumerist.com/consumer/flickr/look-at-our-flickr-faves-236463.php
"Feb 13, 2007
Look At Our Flickr Faves
People are always complimenting us on our photos. The quality of the photo work shown on The Consumerist mainly stems from our preternatural ability to steal images from Flickr. In the course of searching for just the right image, we encounter many, some of which we favorite.
Over the past few months, we've amassed a sizable library of favorites. Some of them you'll recognize from the front page, others were left on the cutting room floor, or referenced for possible future use.
So for glimpse in our thought process, check out our faves. By the way, not all images are work safe. — BEN POPKEN
http://www.flickr.com/photos/consumerist/favorites
"
Pretty blatant. - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That's not accurate. Yes, policy varies per ISP.
If you provide a formal DMCA complaint to the ISP they must, in good faith, make an attempt to reach the offending user, host, or site operator. You really need to direct your complaint to their webhost. They will have an agreement with Gawker that obligates them to comply with the law. Your DMCA letter is YOUR formal request that also notifies the host that if action is not taken you will refer your complaint to the courts. - petsounds, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I'm not really surprised. By and large, all of the Gawker Media sites represent the worst of the "blogosphere".
Ethics, what? Fact-checking, what?
Sensationalism, check. Hypocrisy, check. - Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"its ok to download music without permission, yet you all get your panties in a bunch if someone takes a photo."
I'm a Swede and I'll just say: http://www.copyswede.se/default.asp?ML=2948 - chaosmachine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5if your picture is stolen, you could submit a dmca complaint to their isp. the isp is forced to close their account if enough complaints are received.
- Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4In that case, it's sure a strange way of showing your appreciation for the article...
- ahknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's good that you could care less. We can all care less about this. I'd be worried if you _couldn't_ care less. That'd be a shame. Glad to see that's not the case.
//It's a nit-picking joke. If you don't get it, just move on. - randyzaia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Tell you what, the next time I download a song and use it to promote my somewhat content-devoid anti-corporate blog, I'll give credit where it's due. Would that make you happy?"
Except, that's not the way music copyright works. - fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Not all of us download without permission. Many of use iTunes, a number of us use subscription services, and some of us even rip actual, physical cds that we bought at the store.
- somnambulist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I got banned too. My sin? Apparently I'm an airline PR flack because my knees don't jerk everytime some jerk gets "screwed" by an airline because of unreasonable expectations or just flat out incorrect misinformation.
In reality, I work with corrugated cardboard and put every spare cent I earn towards airfare, logging in excess of 100,000 miles for the last several years. Like I said in an email to Ben, I was banned because I was a better consumer than everyone else on the site. I was informed. - bybonne, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4'Bout time they did something about not. It wouldn't be so bad if they just blogged the photos but they actually save it to their own server. I run into a lot of flickr photos on that site who disabled blogging and sharing..
- eecue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I'm glad that Ben apologized and added a photo credit to my photo. It's too bad that they weren't doing this in the first place and the whole situation makes them look bad.
- dreadsword, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The CC licensing thing is sort of annoying b/c its not universally applied. Some people take the time to license their photos, but the vast majority don't - meaning that people that would be perfectly happy to see their photo get some air time miss out on the chance unless you go through the process of individually contact people.
Try some advanced searches in Flickr for CC licenses vs. non-licensed photos. - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"our preternatural ability to steal images from Flickr"
Definition
Preternatural; Out of or being beyond the normal course of nature; differing from the natural.
It's beyond the course of nature to send an email to the Flickr users whose image you're stealing? - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I upvoted you. You shouldn't be dugg down, but there are plenty of digg users out there with malicious intentions.
I'm glad Consumerist corrected the record. - Heymoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Consumerist does well in spite of Ben. It seems that he holds himself to a lower standard than the people and companies that he puts under the microscope. Mr Popken dumped me from the site as a commenter because I poked fun at his incessant coverage of Wal Mart selling a t-shirt with what looks like a Totenkopf (Skull and Crossbones worn by the SS).
I may be snarky but at least I'm not a hypocrite. - randyzaia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I wonder how many people are commenting on this while listening to pirated music.
- SilenceBroken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1randyzaia is right. These people shouldn't be jumping on The Consumerist if they are are doing the same doggone thing by pirating their music.
As for me, I don't have any pirated music. So I can call The Consumerist a hypocrite as much as I want. : ) - fatdog789, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Consumerist never had any credit to begin with. Have you actually looked at the "scams" they've reported?
- opracilop, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This kind of stuff really shouldn't happen on a site that considers itself a Professional Site. Actions and beliefs like this are akin to thinking sweatshops are a good thing for consumers.
Stop exploiting people's hard work to stick more cash in your pocket.
Buy what you use or get proper permission to use people's work.
Or hell...get your staff to do some work and generate the art for your site. - GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Gawker is also one of the more financially successful blog-o-businesses.
That doesn't help. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2We are a jerkface. = Damage control.
Popken, your apology couldn't be any less transparently insincere. - opracilop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Wrong. It should happen. It's going to happen. Errors are going to occur. The question is, what is done to correct an error, to right a wrong."
WHAT!!?!?!?
That's like saying it's permissable to walk into a McDonalds with a gun and ask for a Big Mac while pointing it at the cashier and then walk out with your meal.
Just cause it can happen is no excuse. It's common sense any high school graduate would know not to do. Don't offer excuses for poor ethics and behavior...it's what brings a society to it's news: Ethical Bankruptcy is no excuse for a lack of common sense. :)
It's good they fessed up to it, but that doesn't mean they should just be let off the hook without some coal raking.
As any Sufi will tell you, "it's okay to forgive, but never forget." :) - opracilop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0well...maybe that was a bit extreme...not a gun...more like a fake dog turd in your hand that you may or may not toss on them. :P
- ironsam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1On a side note, it is interesting how The Consumerist is trying defend the little guy from large corporations' lack of ethics, accountability, etc when those same corporations are providing a majority of the "little guys" with a paycheck every week.
- phoenixPCD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Actually, if you run a website, you can have fun with sites stealing your photos. I did this when I discovered a ton of photos showing up on MySpace.com. rather than getting upset at people stealing the images, I programmed my server to turn the images into ads instead! it's much better and productive."
That only works if the are hot-linking your photos. The Consumerist uploads the photos they steal onto their own servers then edit out things they don't like or need. - phoenixPCD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That only works if the are hotlinking your photos. The Consumerist upoads the photos they steal onto their own servers then edit out things they don't like or need.
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is