flickr change of heart if creative commons license used

[incisor]

Flickr announces all public Creative Commons works are now protected from deletion (https://mashable.com/article/flickr-free-accounts-creative-commons-in-memoriam/?utm_campaign=hp-n-1&utm_source=internal&utm_medium=onsite#6cv1nmeOOZqW)


Just days before Flickr mass deletes photos across its platform, the company has decided to hit its users with some good news.
In a blog post on Friday, Flickr announced (https://blog.flickr.net/2019/03/08/update-on-creative-commons-licenses-and-in-memoriam-accounts/) that it will allow free accounts to host and upload more than the 1,000 photo limit if the photos are licensed freely under Creative Commons. Users can change their current photos to Creative Commons licensing, as well as upload future similarly licensed photos, to their free Flickr accounts.

[JDNSW]

Does anyone trust flickr any more?

[Zeros]

Since the advent of the internet, once you put an image out there you’re unlikely to get it back.

Creative Commons is essentially a way of legalising the inevitable. Which is in the public interest, but is it in the authors interest? It depends if the author wants to share their copyright in the image freely or not.

‘Sharing’ photos now essentially means handing over copyright for free, no matter which digital platform it’s with.

You Can Now License All Of Your Amazing Instagram Photos Through Creative Commons | Cult of Mac (https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.cultofmac.com/186920/you-can-now-license-all-of-your-amazing-instagram-photos-through-creative-commons/amp/)

How an artist can steal and sell your Instagram photos (https://money.cnn.com/2015/05/28/technology/do-i-own-my-instagram-photos/)

[Homestar]

Do I trust Flickr now? - No. Do I still use them - Yep as I have nothing up there that others can't use, share or whatever that I would get upset about. If I go above 1000 pics, I'll pay for a Pro Account

[incisor]

Since the advent of the internet, once you put an image out there you’re unlikely to get it back.

Creative Commons is essentially a way of legalising the inevitable. Which is in the public interest, but is it in the authors interest? It depends if the author wants to share their copyright in the image freely or not.

‘Sharing’ photos now essentially means handing over copyright for free, no matter which digital platform it’s with.

You Can Now License All Of Your Amazing Instagram Photos Through Creative Commons | Cult of Mac (https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.cultofmac.com/186920/you-can-now-license-all-of-your-amazing-instagram-photos-through-creative-commons/amp/)

How an artist can steal and sell your Instagram photos (https://money.cnn.com/2015/05/28/technology/do-i-own-my-instagram-photos/)


indeed

thats why these days you dont put your pics out there at a decent resolution

there are ways of tracking pics you want protected but the vast majority of people that use flickr arent interested in that.

that said, quite a few real pros are starting to use flickr again since yahoo sold it to someone that has a track record of knowing how to go about things.

but they all mention the usual caveats.