Photographers need to be wary of what is happening. It’s a catch 22 situation where so many of us use Facebook for our business but should we have to allow Facebook to do what they wish with our content?
The summary of the changes put out by the ASPM is as follows: Strikethrough indicates language that is being removed. Bold text is used to indicate the new additions.
You can use your privacy settings to limit how your name and profile picture may be associated with commercial, sponsored, or related content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us. You give us permission to use your name, and profile picture, content, and information in connection with commercial, sponsored, or related that content (such as a brand you like) served or enhanced by us , subject to the limits you place. This means, for example, that you permit a business or other entity to pay us to display your name and/or profile picture with your content or information, without any compensation to you. If you have selected a specific audience for your content or information, we will respect your choice when we use it.
The above doesn’t sound that bad, however this is just a small excerpt. the ASMP have a full Q&A page setup where they go into more detail about what Facebook could be allowed to do. It’s definitely worth a read.
We had a big discussion about this on RAW Live earlier today about this. There were many different views thrown around. I think the major issue here is not about images being stolen. We all know that if you don’t want an image to be stolen you shouldn’t post it online. That’s the only sure-fire way of keeping it safe. The issue is that if we post to Facebook we give them the rights to use and make money from our photos and according to the above pretty much everything else. One might argue that with over a billion users what are the chances that they would use your photo, and that is a valid point. Others may say we use Facebook to drive content and grow our businesses for “free”. Again that is valid, however it is because we use Facebook that Facebook exists.
Last year Facebook did $5 billion in revenue, $4.2 billion of that came from advertising. (engadget). I understand that they need to continue to look at new avenues to generate income and obviously our content and information is their product to a certain extent, I just don’t think this is the right way of going about it.
Let’s go back to that “what is the chance, out of 1 billion users they will use your photo (or content)”. That is irrelevant, the issue is that they can. They can use your name to endorse a product or they can use your photo in the advertisement or as the advertisement. It doesn’t sound right does it.
You might think that a watermark would fix the whole issue, well that is not the case. It has been mentioned that Facebook might have the right to alter files which would of course mean removing watermarks. Another option is to put so many watermarks on the photo that it isn’t worth the time, but then what is the point of posting a photo if all you can see is a watermark?
I’m obviously no advocating a Facebook boycott, however I felt you should all be aware, and I’m keen to know your thoughts on the matter.
So do you care? What are the solutions for posting to Facebook?
They haven’t been introduced yet – the ‘commenting phase’ has finished, Facebook now go back and work through what ‘we’ said by way of reaction to their proposal and revise and implement. https://www.facebook.com/…/posts/10151840808824323 – Simon Pollock