Flickr Gets Flack For Non-Flick Flagging

from the web-2.0's-got-rules dept

In the ongoing love affair with everything “web 2.0,” one aspect that is continually stated is how many of these web 2.0 companies are all about building platforms whose communities are free to make them great. In some cases, that can mean that the community can take the sites in totally different directions than what the creators intended — but that should be part of the appeal. However, it seems like web 2.0 might have a few more rules than people would like. Poster child for Web 2.0, Flickr (now owned by Yahoo), is getting a bit of flack these days for deciding that screenshots really don’t belong in their community, and therefore hiding screenshots for users who have more than half of their photos considered “not photographic content.” The company admits that they need to figure out a way to update the rules — which is a good thing, but it’s a reminder that for all the lovely talk about user-generated content and how these sites are there to serve the community — often those communities have limitations placed on them from the top.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Flickr Gets Flack For Non-Flick Flagging”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
anonymous coward says:

get outdoors, make some REAL friends, take a couple pictures of your REAL friends, post them on Flickr. Suddenly screenshots of a virtual world where you aren’t ostracized as a virgin loser geek, won’t seems to appealing. problem solved.

the other interesting flickr topic that hasn’t been addressed much is the sharing of homemade porn thru the ability to set privacy levels on photos. i would bet that more people look at “private” pictures on flickr, than “public” pics. my personal fav is a private, invitation only group called “rough oral”.

Greg says:

This is like the uproar when Wikipedia started locking anonymous edits. “Oh my goodness, the people who pay for these web sites impose some slight degree of control over them! The web is dead! Long live the revolution!”

I don’t understand the problem here. Either you suck it up and stop posting DVD screencaps to a PHOTOGRAPHY website, or you find someplace else that doesn’t offend your delicate sensibilities.

L says:

I signed up for flickr when it was new and the TOS read “images.” There wasn’t anything about not using filckr to host screencaps or vector art or animated gifs made from photographs.

I had screen caps of a spreedsheet I wanted to share with people I was doing a game with. All they needed was the visual and that was handy.

I had photos of a jack o’ lantern in various stages of illumination and animated that to have it come on. My sister showe it to an autistic boy she worked with and he loved it. (If flickr only wants photographs, why do they allow uploading .gifs?)

Many vector artists love the flickr interface and asked, repeatedly, for flickr to consider either allowing this form of artistic expression or opening a sister site for vector art.

None of this activity is indecent or violates any copyright law. But it’s all just wrong, according to flickr. It’s too, bad, too.

Jay says:

Flickr does not say it’s indecent or violates any copyright. Neither do they say it’s wrong. If it were wrong, they would simply delete it. And what’s wrong with the TOS saying “images”? They DO allow you to upload images. In fact, you ARE allowed to upload images of any kind, as long as they’re legal, and people CAN browse your images, EVEN the screenshot types. All they’re saying is that these are not the images that they want appearing in the flickr PUBLIC areas, like the front page or search, because they believe flickr is a photocentric website. It’s like an art gallery allowing you store your artwork in their storage rooms but deciding that they DON’T your doodles on scrap paper displayed in their main hall.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...