Instagram have gone right off the deep end - now selling your photos!

  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
  • Shikasama 18 Dec 2012 13:26:11 6,277 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20767537

    I don't use Instagram but I think this is absolutely ridiculous. Surely Instagram has sealed it's own demise? Why on earth would I (or more likely, a photographer or celebrity) upload a bunch of photos that they can then sell without giving me any sort of compensation? Users are supposed to be grateful for the ability to upload photos online?

    I especially love the part about the change not affecting photo ownerships - pay the 'owner's of the things your selling a fucking royalty then!
  • Deleted user 18 December 2012 13:28:27
    Don't have to use it do you?
  • mrpon 18 Dec 2012 13:29:18 27,648 posts
    Seen 9 seconds ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I seem to recall the twitter app update had a new "apply filters to your photos" feature :)

    Give yourself 5 or gig, you're worth it.

  • SolidSCB 18 Dec 2012 13:29:37 5,848 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Hopefully this means I'll see less moody filtered shots of people's dinner on my Facebook timeline.
  • oceanmotion 18 Dec 2012 13:29:49 15,255 posts
    Seen 19 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Isn't that the policy of every cloud storage service.
  • SClaw 18 Dec 2012 13:31:59 826 posts
    Seen 2 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    A photographer would not be using Instagram.

    Most people will be too lazy to bother quitting, which is what they depend on, and the true value here lays on further linking your data between sites in the group. The pictures themselves are not likely to be worth much of anything.

    If you really must go on over processing your shitty, tedious pictures with emo filters I doubt this news will stop you from using Instagram. And they know it.
  • Dante_Cubit 18 Dec 2012 13:32:13 1,842 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I would recommend Kitcam for a nice little photo app.
  • TheSaint 18 Dec 2012 13:32:22 13,630 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Who would want to pay good money for some shitty filtered photo taken on a phone?
  • jellyhead 18 Dec 2012 13:33:53 24,350 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I don't use it and now i never will! Result :)
    If you're that concerned then watermark your photos or have instagram and facebook banned that?

    This signature intentionally left blank.

  • Mr-Brett 18 Dec 2012 13:35:40 12,676 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    What is the appeal of instagram? does it save you a couple of clicks when uploading to social networks?

    Portable view - Never forget.

  • sport 18 Dec 2012 13:36:33 12,047 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    EG has been selling your posts for years.
  • Dougs 18 Dec 2012 13:37:18 64,912 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Instagram has always baffled me. The odd shot looks quite effective, bit otherwise it just makes photos look rubbish.
  • Zizoo 18 Dec 2012 13:39:15 7,713 posts
    Seen 38 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Sold!

  • mrpon 18 Dec 2012 13:40:30 27,648 posts
    Seen 9 seconds ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Mr-Brett wrote:
    What is the appeal of instagram? does it save you a couple of clicks when uploading to social networks?
    Two words: beer goggles

    Give yourself 5 or gig, you're worth it.

  • midnight_walker 18 Dec 2012 13:41:00 1,640 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    It's a free service. If you don't like it, don't use it, and you've lost nothing. Like the sheep who bleat on about how facebook is changing its policies and they're outraged. Well, it's not costing you a penny. So shut up.
  • sport 18 Dec 2012 13:41:25 12,047 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    ZizouFC wrote:
    Sold!

    Zizou is HAWT!
  • sport 18 Dec 2012 13:41:58 12,047 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    midnight_walker wrote:
    It's a free service. If you don't like it, don't use it, and you've lost nothing. Like the sheep who bleat on about how facebook is changing its policies and they're outraged. Well, it's not costing you a penny. So shut up.
    It's costing you your freedom though.
  • midnight_walker 18 Dec 2012 13:47:07 1,640 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    sport wrote:
    It's costing you your freedom though.
    If people valued their freedom that highly they wouldn't use facebook. And they wouldn't continue to use Instagram after this revelation. But they will, because people are idiots.

    Incidentally I don't use Facebook for those very reasons. And I don't use instagram because I'm not a 13 year old girl.
  • jellyhead 18 Dec 2012 13:47:10 24,350 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    @midnight_walker How did their recent vote go? The one with the broken app that wouldn't let you vote? Probably went through anyway. Facebook say they have policies and procedures but they ignore them when they want to and they also make it so that quorum cannot be reached so the public's opinion doesn't count and they do what they want anyway.

    Free or not their policies are terrible. It's just one big extended marketing survey these days. blech.

    This signature intentionally left blank.

  • Mr-Brett 18 Dec 2012 13:49:53 12,676 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    mrpon wrote:
    Mr-Brett wrote:
    What is the appeal of instagram? does it save you a couple of clicks when uploading to social networks?
    Two words: beer goggles
    Oh fair enough then, I guess if you add enough shit over a photo it might disguise how crap it is.

    Portable view - Never forget.

  • Salaman 18 Dec 2012 13:50:14 18,251 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    sport wrote:
    EG has been selling your posts for years.
    That would explain psychotext's night vision goggles appearing in the Daily Mail or wherever it was.
  • ibenam 18 Dec 2012 13:53:25 1,279 posts
    Seen 50 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    If they really wanted my mankini pictures all they had to do was ask.
  • midnight_walker 18 Dec 2012 13:58:09 1,640 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    @jellyhead I've no idea. Although it was a complete bullshit vote anyway. From what little I read they wanted something like 30% of the total active users to vote against before they would stop their changes. That's ridiculous and they knew it would never happen. But again, if people truly cared that much they would just stop using facebook.
  • Psychotext 18 Dec 2012 15:09:37 52,802 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Salaman wrote:
    That would explain psychotext's night vision goggles appearing in the Daily Mail or wherever it was.
    The Star thank you very much. I wouldn't be seen dead in the fail!
  • whatfruit 18 Dec 2012 15:13:02 1,080 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    "Everything is free apart from what you give us. That we own."
  • kinky_mong 18 Dec 2012 16:40:51 9,607 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Good, hopefully this will mean much fewer tweets with instagram links which then fail to load on the Iphone app.

    I'll never get my Orc looking the same again.

  • The-Bodybuilder 18 Dec 2012 17:26:32 13,623 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    midnight_walker wrote:
    It's a free service. If you don't like it, don't use it, and you've lost nothing. Like the sheep who bleat on about how facebook is changing its policies and they're outraged. Well, it's not costing you a penny. So shut up.
    Erm, not really.

    To change policy after signing up isn't justified with a "but it's free, you can leave".
    Yes, I can happily leave (I have), but it doesn't change the fact that the account still exists and they now forever own details about me. That wasn't the case when people initially signed up (as far as I'm aware).
  • Deleted user 18 December 2012 17:30:09
    SClaw wrote:
    A photographer would not be using Instagram.
    You'd hope this, but given "photographer" now seems to be the profession of choice for everyone who can afford a camera, I'm sure there's more than a few of them out there.
  • morriss 18 Dec 2012 18:05:48 70,753 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    You need to have cleavage for instagram to work. Or take blacka nd white city photos.

    It's bollocks. It was bollocks months ago. It's pretty girls and black and white cities. That's it. It's shit.
  • superdelphinus 18 Dec 2012 18:31:18 7,277 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    A good another monumentally trivial issue for internet people to wet their pants over...
  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply