Flynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14593 times:
Before any moderator proceeds to delete this thread I honestly and truly think it has a place here in the photography forum because we, the photographers of Airliners.net, have made this site what it is today, one photo at a time, for many, many years. I am troubled over the lack of any clarification on the following snippet from the new Terms of Use, updated on February 8, 2008:
Quote: Subject to your right to terminate your license to us as described in Section 5(C), you hereby grant Airliners.net an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, modify, transmit, distribute, publicly perform and display (including in each case by means of a digital audio and video transmission), advertise in, on, and around, and create derivative works of the Content you submit or make available for inclusion on or through the Service, and to incorporate such Content into other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, for purposes such as (but not limited to) promoting the Site or promoting the availability of such Content on the Site.
You also hereby waive any moral rights you may have under the laws of any jurisdiction in Content you submit or make available on or through the Service. While it is our general policy to include your name alongside your Content, we are not obligated to do so.
So, what does this mean to myself and others who submit photographs here?
The last sentence of that snippet really troubles me.
UnattendedBag From United States, joined Oct 2003, 1591 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 14601 times:
Yes .... i am waiting to see what "the legal team" comes up with so Admin can confirm , in site related they have a thread on this very subject !
The thing that is a little alarming is the way its worded , we as the photographer can loose all rights to the image if promoted through Demand Media .
If that is the case i have a sneaky feeling a few images will be pulled .
Whappeh From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1456 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 14537 times:
It almost sounds like (and I am in a very tired state, so I could be very wrong), that they want to maybe use the images on the site for their own purposes with out asking us... maybe as in they sell the images to companies, etc.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2667 posts, RR: 65 Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 14536 times:
In words of one syllable (or equivalent), does this mean that we waive our copyright and all that goes along with that? In effect, our photo belongs to us and DM once it is accepted?
747438 From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2007, 573 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 14498 times:
Quoting Psych (Reply 4): In words of one syllable (or equivalent), does this mean that we waive our copyright and all that goes along with that? In effect, our photo belongs to us and DM once it is accepted?
Mmm.
Quoting GuamVICE (Reply 6): If this is indeed the case, I'm not sure I want to share my images with the site any longer...but I'll wait until clarification is brought about...
This definateky needs clarification from the owners.
If it is their intention to use our photos in this manner they will be shooting themselves in the foot
Ander From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 358 posts, RR: 31 Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 14490 times:
Quoting GuamVICE (Reply 6): If this is indeed the case, I'm not sure I want to share my images with the site any longer...but I'll wait until clarification is brought about...
Mclaudio From Portugal, joined Jan 2005, 137 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 14482 times:
I am another one looking to this issue carefully, specially this part:
Quote: (...)you hereby grant Airliners.net an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, modify, transmit, distribute, publicly perform and display (...)
If the rules changed at any point during my relation as a photographer with airliners.net as a way to show my work, perhaps it is time to stop and think on the terms of that relation, after all, I never gave to the company now running the site any license to use whatsoever in the terms written above. I have always seen Airliners.net as a great website to host "pictures of modern aircrafts", not a website where I would upload a photo and others would make use of the photo as they please.
But it is better to wait and see what comes out of this.
Proudly one of the 6 million Portuguese that support SL Benfica!!
Flynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14452 times:
Quoting GuamVICE (Reply 6): If this is indeed the case, I'm not sure I want to share my images with the site any longer...but I'll wait until clarification is brought about...
Agreed. That being said, if this is the case, I would be interested in the legal ramifications that would go along with it.
Spencer From United Kingdom (England), joined Apr 2004, 1111 posts, RR: 28 Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14423 times:
Let's say this goes ahead then; I'm supposing DM will charge for our work should they be contacted? Oh man, this is aint right! Why don't we get a poll going to see who will pull their work just to show DM how much they could be set to loose?
Spencer.
Spencer From United Kingdom (England), joined Apr 2004, 1111 posts, RR: 28 Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14417 times:
Tim, it's not a matter of getting ahead of ourselves really mate, more like getting prepared for the worse! Perhaps a poll wouldn't be a bad idea though? And honestly, would you be prepared to give up your chances of earning some money (from your work on THIS site)? I'm not prepared!
Spencer.
TimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3654 posts, RR: 78 Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14415 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Wel to get ahead of things myself, I think it probably means they can use your photos in new site features, just linked as usual. It will not mean DM will start selling your photos because that would be unacceptable.
Again let's just wait for an explanation. This legal mumbo jumbo probably obscures the real intention.
LeadingEdge From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 57 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14406 times:
I only have 29 photos on here so if we are signing away our rights to copyright its not a major deal for me. However I am sure the Pros and Semi Pros who have made major contributions to the success of A-Net over the years will be somewhat concerned by this. You only have until the 7th March to request deletion before they are free to use your images.
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 1518 posts, RR: 23 Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 14400 times:
"create derivative works of the Content"
That term worries me. But rather than making guesses, I'll probably just get a work colleague who is a legal wiz to take a look at these and see what implications it could have.
While the legal mumbo jumbo may obscure the real intention, it also seems to be quite obtuse to allow a very broad scope of possibilities, at least that's how I understand it on my first couple of readings.
Dvincent From United States, joined Jan 2007, 1230 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 14369 times:
I don't grant Demand Media the rights to do anything with my photographs except display them. That is very broad, sweeping language there. I've seen it before and it's never a good thing.
Suffice to say if that wording stays in there, I'm pulling my photos off the site.
New England Airports! Sony Alpha a700, Sigma 50-500, Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, Tamron 17-50, Minolta 100-200 f/4.5.
Mat1979 From France, joined Dec 2005, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 14363 times:
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14): Wel to get ahead of things myself, I think it probably means they can use your photos in new site features, just linked as usual. It will not mean DM will start selling your photos because that would be unacceptable.
Again let's just wait for an explanation. This legal mumbo jumbo probably obscures the real intention.
I'm afraid it gives them a lot of leeway. Maybe their intention is nice today, but what if they change their mind 2 years from now?
Quote: Quote:
Subject to your right to terminate your license to us as described in Section 5(C), you hereby grant Airliners.net an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, modify, transmit, distribute, publicly perform and display (including in each case by means of a digital audio and video transmission), advertise in, on, and around, and create derivative works of the Content you submit or make available for inclusion on or through the Service, and to incorporate such Content into other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, for purposes such as (but not limited to) promoting the Site or promoting the availability of such Content on the Site.
You also hereby waive any moral rights you may have under the laws of any jurisdiction in Content you submit or make available on or through the Service. While it is our general policy to include your name alongside your Content, we are not obligated to do so.
My reading of this is, once you've accepted the new rules, they're free. If they want to use the photos in new site features, as usual, they'll can, but if they want to use them for other purposes too, they can as well.
The email i received contained :
Quote: Your continued use of Airliners.net after March 8, 2008 will indicate your acceptance of the new Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
The safest thing to do, as a photographer, i believe, is not to wait beyond march 8, but pull the photo one cares for, unless the terms of use change (especially the "not limited to", and "irrevocable", perpetual").
That's what i intend to do, for my best pic. You can always reupload your best pics without trouble, it appears pulling your pics off the site past march 8 will be difficult.
Dvincent From United States, joined Jan 2007, 1230 posts, RR: 9 Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 14355 times:
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14): Wel to get ahead of things myself, I think it probably means they can use your photos in new site features, just linked as usual. It will not mean DM will start selling your photos because that would be unacceptable.
What it means, Tim, is that DM can use your photographs in, say, another Demand Media website for advertising without your permission. It means if Demand Media publishes a magazine, they can use the photos without asking (or paying) you. It means they could be used in books, slideshows, videos/DVDs, on merchandise without your say.
Now, what it doesn't mean, is they can't give it to another company to use. But as long as it's a Demand Media production, it's fair game.
They might not do it. But they just gave themselves the rights to. I don't believe they'd give themselves the rights without the intention to use them.
New England Airports! Sony Alpha a700, Sigma 50-500, Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, Tamron 17-50, Minolta 100-200 f/4.5.
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2629 posts, RR: 35 Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 14343 times:
Quoting Flynavy (Thread starter): you hereby grant Airliners.net an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, modify, transmit, distribute, publicly perform and display (including in each case by means of a digital audio and video transmission), advertise in, on, and around, and create derivative works of the Content you submit or make available
I will NOT grant Anet these rights. Why on earth should I?
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2333 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 14335 times:
Well guys we all kinda suspected the site would go off the rails at some point under DM - just not this soon. The love of money seems to have over-shadowed the love of aviation. I only have 67 pics in the database (with 12 in the queue) but I shall have no worries in removing them - and uploading them elsewhere - should this situation turn ugly.
Diezel From Netherlands, joined Oct 2002, 623 posts, RR: 12 Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 14325 times:
Quoting Mat1979 (Reply 19): and to incorporate such Content into other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, for purposes such as (but not limited to) promoting the Site or promoting the availability of such Content on the Site.
Does this mean that they, for example, can create books or magazines and use our photos's for free?
Maiznblu_757 From United States, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 59 Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 14289 times:
Regardless what Monique says, the portion of the terms we are currently discussing needs to be rewritten to reflect what it really means. Maybe a few 'IE's should be included.
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3039 posts, RR: 23 Reply 25, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 14272 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 20): What it means, Tim, is that DM can use your photographs in, say, another Demand Media website for advertising without your permission.
Quoting Diezel (Reply 23): Does this mean that they, for example, can create books or magazines and use our photos's for free?
The text says you grant a license to Airliners.net, not to Demand Media. But what exactly does that mean? Can they, indeed, do an Airliners.net magazine or book, for exampe? That is one of the things that need to be explained.
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
26 KarlADrage: Quite simply, if it's not rewritten, the vast majority of photographers will remove their images. Even if there's no intention now to undertake any of
27 Viv: Karl, You are exactly right. Personally, if the proposed new terms of use are not abandoned - or substantially amended so as to allow uploaders to re
28 Jez: On the one hand I can't say that I'm pleased with the new TOU, but there is a part of me that thinks - How much can they really do with a 1024 wide JP
29 Flynavy: That isn't the point. It's a matter of principle. Demand Media didn't put the time and effort into shooting, editing, and uploading my photos here -
30 Dvincent: It's the principle of the thing, Jez...
31 Mclaudio: That is in fact true, but sometimes is not what you can do, but how you do it.
32 APFPilot1985: I would advise you not to make any interpretations that you don't want accepted as fact. It was made very clear to me that the Crew operates as repre
33 LeadingEdge: It would seem so. Tim I think that people need an independent legal interpretation not one from Demands own legal team. It is the wording that they s
34 TravelRalf: The wording is quite clear to me. I as a photographer provide my pictures for free and DM can do what they want and make some decent money. Great busi
35 Cpd: That's correct as well. But if you are worried, you could just remove the photos you really care about until things are cleared up. If you have high-
36 StealthZ: Hi all, On first reading the new Airliners.net TOU did raise some red flags with me... Ok, as well as on the 2nd, 3rd and subsequent readings. Having
37 Flynavy: This is how I interpret clause 5B: If you upload photos to Airliners.net, you waive all rights on the material you submit and they become the property
38 Jez: But Demand Media didn't force you to do that. I agree that what DM are saying is wrong in principle, but in practice will it really make any differen
39 Flynavy: DM didn't make this site what it is today. DM hasn't been a member here for nearly six years. If a publisher contacts me directly, yes, I'd be happy
40 Kukkudrill: Yes the text is quite clear that a.net can publish your photos in any way and for any purpose it chooses - editorial, advertising, print, internet, b
41 Mclaudio: indeed, but by doing that, you will be breaking the deal you have with DM if you agree with their terms after the 8th of March. Honestly...I am not s
42 Flynavy: Indeed the entire community as a whole if these terms aren't amended. I encourage all photographers who have photos on this site to spread the word a
43 TravelRalf: I'm thinking of sending an email to DM where I clearly state that I do not agree to the terms of use regarding my pictures already in the database bec
44 TRVYYZ: The terms the more I read seems to confuse me more.[Edited 2008-02-09 06:52:51]
45 StealthZ: Does this new licensing regime mean that.... In this hypothetical case... I am at Heard Island in the Southern Ocean and a Boebus A746i arrives carryi
46 Kukkudrill: No because the terms give a.net a non-exclusive license, meaning they can use your photos but they can't stop you doing the same. BUT under the new t
47 Flyheligirl: Hi all, I can completely understand needing clarification on these terms. I went over them with our legal department for weeks to ensure that they we
48 Spoogle: Some very interesting reading here.... as i mentioned in my post number 2 i will be watching for any statements from DM regarding this issue , i also
49 Fly747: So what if one day, say 2 years from now, I no longer wish to have my images posted here would they NOT comply with my request to have them all delete
50 Flynavy: I appreciate the response, especially on a weekend. The way I see it is that the lifeblood of this community - indeed the very future of this site -
51 Tbird: Sounds to me that Demand Media is looking at revenue opportunity by selling our pictures... This doesn't sound on the level to me at all. Why would I
52 APFPilot1985: Well seeing how the terms require a 15 day notice to have photos removed, anyone who wants to do that must let you know within the next 15 days.
53 Mat1979: Just to be on the safe side, i wanted to have a look at how to remove a pic of mine from the database. It appears there is no automated process to do
54 Fly747: You have to send an email. Not sure if it's the editors or screeners though. I'd probably send it to both just to be sure. Ivan
55 Stil: What's this? You have a explicit TOU but you don't have an explicit answer? It doesn't looks fine to me. It seems like a "don't do anything until the
56 Kukkudrill: Monique, thanks for chiming in. I will look forward to hearing from you. Allow me to emphasise that I do not only want the terms clarified. I want th
58 Viv: So do I. As I said, if the terms are not changed so that I retain my existing rights I WILL PULL ALL MY SHOTS FROM THE SITE. I hope that is clear eno
59 Fly747: The wording must change if they intend to stay the aviation site. Ivan
61 Irish251: If you went over them for weeks you must have considered such a key issue as the one that everyone is concerned about. What does "tailored for the a.
62 TimdeGroot: Hi All I know my interpretation counts for as much as anyone's. I merely wanted to say that I do not believe DM wants to do anything else with the pho
63 Bjcc: I'm a little concerned with Monique's line "I went over them with our legal department for weeks to ensure that they were tailored for the a.net commu
64 Middleken: Tim, I appreciate your input. But what they may want to do now is not the real issue, it is leaving the door open with that wording that allows them
65 Jez: No so. It's a non-exclusive licence that would be granted to DM by accepting the TOU and it's only on the content that I submit (i.e. the 1024 JPG).
66 Ptrjong: How about an upload strike if this is not resolved in an acceptable manner in a few day's time? That could have some noticeable effect on site traffic
67 JohnJ: Considering the hell that's raised around this place if someone uses an A.net photo even for a personal flight sim site without permission, I can't im
69 Flynavy: Okay Tim... Say you're right and they aren't going to change the way the photos are used as it stands today... Why, then, do they need to have "an ir
70 Mat1979: Hi Tim I agree with you here. But who's to say it will be the same 3 years down the road? If they have no intentions to use the photos for other purp
72 Codeshare: Monique, for the rules to be tailored to the a.net community, the points and understanding of them should be at least changed to something that will a
74 Dvincent: We don't want clarification. We want it removed. Thanks.
75 KarlADrage: Indeed. I would imagine this is very black and white for most contributors here. "You" lose the right to do as you wish with MY images, or I will remo
76 LeadingEdge: Not quite true. This is a term of the new agreement and so is not effective until the 8th March.[Edited 2008-02-09 09:13:59]
77 Foxtrot183: I have been uploading to this site for nearly six years. This is the first time I have posted to any forum. Unless these new terms are CHANGED. My 400
78 Jetmatt777: I only have 12 pics, but I also will have NO HESITATION removing them, even though it took me 2 years of rejection after rejection and spending hours
79 Boeingfreak: I'm worried as well but let's just calm down a bit and wait till we get an explanation! But one thing is for sure: I will not allow Demand Media to us
80 YVRtoYYZ: Beware...be very aware of this statement. Essentially this statement implies that DM is not obligated inform the photography community of the legal i
81 Clickhappy: I would also like to ask my fellow photogs to be patient. I don't think the verbiage means what you think it means, a couple of lawyers I have had rea
82 Flynavy: I eagerly await their reply. That being said, this isn't Yahoo. Business or not, this site is a community. This particular clause in the terms of use
83 Clickhappy: Not as a screener, but as a photographer.
84 TimdeGroot: The issue will be resolved I am sure. Maybe some words have to be changed but DM cares about a.net and they will not do something that will drive 99%
85 NIKV69: Good advice Royal, there has been enough scare mongering here. I doubt very highly DM worded it that way to start using our pics without our permissi
86 Tu154HAJ: Boeingfreak says come down, but I think everybody should post here... If DM won't see that most of the photos will be removed, if they don't change th
87 Dvincent: Royal, if you were looking at Flickr, you should include the rest of that segment of the TOS. This is far, far different than what DM has written up
89 Flynavy: So, let me get this straight... You don't have a problem letting Demand Media... Use... Reproduce... Modify... Transmit... Distribute... Publicly dis
90 Ander: Really Royal, do you think so?? you hereby grant Airliners.net an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, repr
91 Tbird: I think this community deserves an answer now...and not on Monday. Especially after the email A.net just sent out, detailing these changes. Its seem v
92 NIKV69: No Chris if you read my post I said I don't think that is what DM is going to do. If DM want's the ability to use our work for any reason without ask
93 APFPilot1985: They will have that permission when the new TOU go into effect, enjoy your blinders though. Even better Nick, tell us how you interpret the new terms
94 Fly747: Ok Nik, so, in your own words, what exactly does this paragraph mean? Ivan
95 EMA747: When this issue is resolved will DM send an email to all conserned detailing where we as photographers stand? I would also like one in non-legal terms
96 UA935: After years and years of hard work on the part of Johan this site was the premier place for showcasing aviation photography. Since DM have taken over
97 Ryangooner: Im ready to pull - i probably wont be the 1st but i sure as hell wont be the last !!
98 Raptors: This is simple guy's!!! We, the photographers are what makes this site, if we remove, or refuse to upload to airliners.net then the website could well
99 Whappeh: After reading what we read, we're all ready to pull. :/
100 KarlADrage: This was just posted elsewhere. It's taken from DM's homepage: Demand MediaTM is building a different type of new media company. With a proprietary me
101 Eadster: My god this place is changing.... Think it maybe time to go....
102 Spoogle: Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm ........... On a more serious note .. What Royal has said is spot on & makes a lot of sense , but until everything is clearer tha
103 Jetmatt777: I have a feeling they want to turn this site into a stock photo website, getting free photos and then selling them off to companies interested in them
104 Harlequin67: My first post here. My thoughts run along the line of......Why have they decided to change the rules? Who does it benefit? Rules normally change to bl
105 Dimage: Hi, i think that those words used in the new TOU can be interpreted in very different ways and that many photographers like me are confused by DM taki
106 Mclaudio: I wouldn't call it exactly a strike, but...as I am seriously thinking to ask my photos on the db to be deleted if all this non-sense wins, I decided
107 Whappeh: I've done the same. Partly as a show of protest and how serious we/I am, and partly for the reasons you listed.
108 Foxtrot183: Just deleted all 21 photos I had in the upload queue (all passed first screening). Suggest a boycott of all other threads except this one, until we ge
109 Jetmatt777: Same here, also removed my photos from queue. --- I wonder what Johan is thinking right now? That his creation that took him 10 years and alot of mon
110 Scbriml: To me, these words: clearly say that DM can use any photo I upload (even if I ask for it to be removed the next day) for whatever they want, whenever
111 Aloges: That's also crossed my mind. The scary thing is they would actually have the right to do this with those lovely new terms. If it happens, we'll know
112 Jetmatt777: Does anyone know if this also applies to MyAviation.net? If so, I might consider having those deleted also if I do have my A.net ones deleted. Not lik
113 Eksath: Like others have mentioned before, I will delete mine as well. Just deleted all pictures in my upload queue. I disagree with this direction that the w
114 Whappeh: DM would probably of jacked the price up... though to be honest, I'm sure if that was even in the realm of possibility, a lot of us would chip in...
115 TimdeGroot: Guys explanations are on the way. Please wait with the photo deletions until we really know what's going on Tim
116 Boeingfreak: Hi all, reading through this thread and the one in site-related again makes me worry even more! I just have put up a forum to discuss the TOU without
117 Fly747: As said in other forums on the net, some have already requested to have their photos removed from the database. I, and I'm sure many others, don't fee
118 Middleken: what about the bolded parts - seems pretty clear to me with "other works", and not obligated to include our name. So they can create other works with
119 Dvincent: Tim, You're a good guy and I respect what you do, but this shoot first ask questions later mentality of DM has been their modus operandi from day one
120 Bruce: I read over it and really, I'm not getting worked up over it. Many website have similar wording about content that users post. I think it is common in
121 Stil: There were a lot of threads about photographers giving their pics for free. Why DM will let hundreds of good photographers go just to sell a few remai
122 Andrej: Hey all, not A.net photographer, but I would never agree to such terms. The photographer should always have rights to his/her shot no matter what, unl
123 Ander: Bruce, we're talking about top quality aviation photos here! And they want almost unlimited rights to them!!! That's a NoGo for me!!
124 Spencer: That maybe the case, but did you (like I) take years uploading hundreds of images to let this happen? I certainly didn't! This just isn't cricket peo
125 Bjcc: Tim has a point about rushing in. Its Saturday (in Europe) and lawyers don't tend to work weekends. Waiting till monday wont harm anyone, so why not l
126 Dahlgardo: Hi all Does anyone have an answer to this question ? The mail from DM did not specify any e-mail or link, and you cannot send a reply to sender-addres
127 Kukkudrill: Sorry but this doesn't wash. Look at the terms of service of Flickr and see how much more limited and specific they are compared to the ones DM have
128 Eksath: Charles, By the way, there was a famous incident (reported in the NYT- i will try and post link to it). A teenage girl (frm the US) visiting Australi
129 Deeplight: Hello Photographers, Crew AND Members, I want to let everyone know that all photorights will be held by the photographer and I will personally oversee
130 Mclaudio: I am sorry to partially disagree Mr Bruce, but aviation photography is an hobby. It is not correct to see isolated photos uploaded by enthusiasts as
131 Mirage: Mr. Paulo Emanuele, Whatever happens in Airliners.net that is directly conected with OUR photos must be done communicating with US, the photographers
132 Silver1SWA: Alrighty, thank you for the response Paulo. Surely most of us can relax a little bit now?
133 Spencer: Paulo, firstly thanks for getting back to us. Although it seems from your statement that things are to remain the same, there still seems to be a slig
134 Kukkudrill: I heard about this. The problem was not Flickr's terms of service (Flickr had nothing to do with the case) but the fact that the photos were posted u
135 Aloges: The way I got him, the DM legal department are the ones who created and made the a.net crew publish these new terms. If you look at flightlevel350.co
136 JRadier: Nope... All I get from his reply is DM's standard tactic, shoot first, ask questions second. Needless to say, with us being at the receiving end this
137 APFPilot1985: Paulo's answer doesn't clear anything up. WHat if the "new features" are putting our un-modified images on a t-shirt and selling them? The current TOU
138 Aloges: Was it supposed to? He said sorry and that he'd get back to the legal department and then to us.
139 TimdeGroot: Just to clarify a bit of Paulo's post in light of subsequent ones. It relates to form as well. So it will only be linked thumbnail content that may be
140 LTU932: Just make sure that the wording will become easier to understand and free of any potential misunderstandings. Or in the initial TOU, you could have i
141 KLM772ER: I don't think there is any need to make some overhasty decisions.. I can't believe DM will risk loosing most if not all photographers by keeping those
142 747438: I would be surprised if many keep their work on the site. I will be pulling my contributions too
143 Aloges: I find this completely ridiculous. After the past difficult months, I would have thought that everyone from DM dealing with this site and its users w
144 Viv: Let us hope so. The ToU in their present form are NOT acceptable to me. Unless they are changed to something acceptable I will have no option but to
145 Dvincent: Tim, Like Aloges said, don't take it personally. We care about our images and we care about the site. On a more positive note, we can start thinking
146 JRadier: I wouldn't have cared too much I think (not sure), but after this stunt (and the others preceding this one) DM has lost a lot of credit!
147 747438: Of that there is no doubt. I feel trust has gone out of the window with DM
148 ZakHH: Paulo, honestly, I am ready to believe that it was never Demand Media's intention to (mis-)use photos in any other way than they were used before her
149 Dvincent: Jurgen, I wouldn't disagree with that... I'm just saying that if the terms were right I'd be OK with it.
150 Beechcraft: Hi all, the above is very well said. Please stick with us, i´m sure things will be solved at latest after the weekend. I know it´s a very frustatin
151 Ryan h: It seems that Demand Media see the dollar signs flashing and are willing to shoot themselves in the foot. I probably won't go down the drastic route o
152 Lennymuir: Having read this thread, I would have no hesitation pulling +2,200 Clarification is required A.S.A.P. (!) The new 'Terms', as written, is lunacy. If u
153 NIKV69: Unfortunately Ryan that will never be the case. The "let's pull our pics" paranioa has been around here long before this witch hunt. Just look at the
155 Scottieprecord: I too plan on pulling my shots if the Terms are not restated in an acceptable manner... However, I highly doubt this will happen. Hope this gets worke
156 Dvincent: Nick, I have reduced my uploading as of late because I have been feeling ambivalent about the site and the direction it's heading in. The flat out co
157 Jorge1812: Would someone here be so kind to tell me? I'm no native english speaker and don't have the time to read the entire Terms and this entire thread. Said
158 Rara: Everyone, I'm not one of the paranoid types and I'm against overreacting in all forms. But in this case, even though I'm not a photographer, I must wa
159 TimdeGroot: Jeez have a little faith in the man. I have met him and he s one of the biggest aviation enthusiasts I have ever met! We don't have to take Paulo's w
160 Aloges: And what I don't get is why anyone would feel a need to prance into every thread on this issue that has obviously incensed quite a few more people th
161 Flynavy: I have pulled all my photos from the upload cue in protest.
162 Deeplight: Hello Everyone I'm back on line. Please remember the TOU were vauge and not proportionate to the size Anet had grown to and were written by someone Jo
163 Flynavy: It took your legal department four weeks to come up with the new Terms of Use. If no one in your legal department could foresee the utter train wreck
164 Aloges: I dunno... how about "free beer for everyone"? For all we can tell for the time being, the concerns about copyright have been heard clearly. Those re
165 Dvincent: I will wait and see. The ball is in your court.
166 Aloges: There's another, rather uncomfortable, issue that's been brought up elsewhere. What about the photos uploaded years ago by now deceased members? I'd j
167 NIKV69: What direction is that? All I have seen is assumptions of this and that. It's true that the migration was rough and we can argue all day about the do
168 Trekster: Thats the thing thats been getting on EVERYONES nerves since DM took over. No talking from them to us. I have only occasionally been in this forum, a
169 LTU932: Please let us know when that summary is online. Indeed. In the case of AirNikon for example, wouldn't the copyright pass to the next of kin or a pers
170 Dvincent: Nick, I don't think you know me very well, but I am a fairly reasonable and rational guy. I have not been panicking, swearing, or flying off the hand
171 APFPilot1985: It is very important to note that a mere assurance from Paolo that nothing bad will be done with the images, and the new TOU remaing the same will not
172 Cubsrule: Paolo, as someone who knows something about the law, I can assure you that the legal department can step in without obscuring what y'all are trying t
173 Tappan: DM should become a "broker" to any of us who want our photos to make a little bit of cash. I understand that not all of us want to sell or care much a
174 Skyliner: Don't know if this has been suggested, but perhaps photographers should consider sending a notice to DM, at the address stated in P5.C, that your 'acc
175 Whappeh: That is a great idea, though I doubt that has any chance of being implemented.
176 Jetmatt777: Pimping? Edit: That would also put the name out there that ALL photos on the site are stock and can be used when and however they want, even photos t
177 JeffM: I had a friend look at the terms of use as they are currently, he works in a legal office for a marketing firm, though he is not a lawyer. He said bas
178 Shep2: DM generates revenue by selling First Class Memberships and advertising. Is this not enough to support their payroll? Obviously not - as their payroll
179 Jetmatt777: It really insults my intelligence that a company would think that we would be too ignorant to notice what they tried to pull, and think we would actu
180 QANTAS077: thanks for that, as I said in the other thread, IF DM thinks this is a correct course then they can expect a bill for my travel, air fares and anythi
181 Maiznblu_757: Hope to see some results in the next week. If not? Adios. In the words of the great Javier Guerrero... "Standing by for higher".[Edited 2008-02-09 21:
182 JeffM: I am expecting results by Monday, Tuesday at the latest. How hard would it be for a lawyer to re-write this into something that doesn't make me feel
183 747438: I too have just received that E mail. A lesson for DM perhaps.
184 Eksath: I got that email too and I bet more than quite a few others have got it too. DM is getting checkmated. DM better light a fire under their so called "
185 Graphic: An icepick to the cornhole of everyone who has uploaded for the last ten years.
186 Flynavy: Not to mention the fact that these new terms, once finalized by the legal department, MUST have been approved by Demand Media - and therefore Paulo E
187 ShyFlyer: Given DM's track record, I'd be very surprised if that happened. Yup. Even if DM clears this mess up, the damage done to the photographer's trust wil
188 Harlequin67: I did not tell my wife about this flare up, but asked her thoughts on the offending terms. She is a well read and knowledgable person. Her reaction,
189 Tonimr: I haven't been able to reply to the email used to notify the new rules because there was "No such user". Now, I've had to "buy" the rights to publicly
190 Jawed: How can you guys stand the popups and generally annoying ad spam on JetPhotos.net? The site is so ghetto and doesn't appear nearly as professional or
191 AndrewUber: I received that e-mail too - and I've already begun uploading my photos over there. I expect several things will happen in the coming days - 1) other
192 Flynavy: Premium members on JP, unlike FirstClass on A.net, are not subjected to any off-site advertisments.
193 Codeshare: May I suggest that until the issue is resolved, the March 8 acceptance date is suspended or moved to a later date. KS/codeshare
194 Cpd: I would also like to request that. It is the most reasonable thing to do. Everyone is very concerned about the implications of these changes, or othe
195 Eadster: All this and the damn site still doesn't work properly. If this ain't dollar hunting I don't know what is! JP will be rubbing their hands together aft
196 GOCAPS16: Well, there goes my career selling photos from this site. It's not the pop up or spam on JP, it's the guy that runs that site that treats us well, unl
197 Bjcc: I have to say that caution is still required. What Paulo said was: "Please be patient and I will fix this situation.We will provide a summary to every
198 Shep2: Airliners.net has been the KING of aviation photos for a LONG TIME... I believe Demand Media will do a great job of damage control - they will clean u
199 Tommy Mogren: DM made bad move. Releasing these rules without checking with it's photographers is hitting them back BIG now. What was the rush ? Why releasing it if
200 Mclaudio: Excuse me for the side note, but I have a @hotmail.com email and haven't received yet the "famous" email sent by airliners. Anyone else having the sam
201 Jid: I have a hotmail.com addy and it arrived in the junk folder ... How ironic !!!
202 Foxtrot183: Anyone with photos on JP should have received an email thet includes: "This additional text serves one purpose -- to put in writing the policy we've
203 Flynavy: This was just brought to my attention... And adds more fuel to this fire, unfortunately. A user contacted me about the recent changes to the Terms of
204 Trekster: Still cant see what alot of people can I see!! All is well and rosey with anet. I think the 200+ posts disagree with ya Nik
205 Spencer: Mark, if this site has the reputation that it's supposed to have, then we as photographers don't need a broker trying to flog our work really. I, as
206 N1120A: With all due respect, based on Paulo's comments, combined with the very shaky ground those TOU put DM on, I am not inclined to believe this. I hope y
207 Vfw614: I think you guys need to be realistic. Quite honestly, if this is a move to milk the cow, there is little reason for DM to follow your demands and cha
208 Jez: Well DM have given us a deadline, so maybe it would be a good idea to give them a deadline by which they have to amend the proposed TOU to an acceptab
209 NIKV69: Yes but in a few days time all your pics will still be here and you will still upload here. It's proven time and time again. What I find equally iron
210 TimdeGroot: Good morning all I've just read all the new posts and there have been a few interesting developments. All I can say is that Paulo has told us this has
211 Flynavy: I think it's humorous you attempted to quote Chris' comments when NONE of what you quoted was what he said. He simply re-affirmed his site's terms of
212 Mclaudio: Well...I wouldn't be sure about that. This subject is being discussed in several non-English speaking forums and the mood is the same. Remove the pho
213 Samuel32: I'm feel the same as everyone else, and I want what everybody (photogs) else wants. The sad fact is that people have already started pulling their sho
214 TimdeGroot: Cannot stress this enough: A.net will not take your copyrights in any way. Our GM has clearly said so. I hope everyone can wait a few days until this
215 Ptrjong: I have 1,200 photos here and none on Jetphotos.net or any other competing site. This is because I liked this place far better. I do have to wonder if
216 Viv: Tim, I will wait - and would urge others to do the same. However, reassurances alone will not be sufficient - unless the new ToU are withdrawn or rad
217 Cathay111: Right behind you Chad, I have a massive exposure to this change by way of my own work and that of the late Frank Schaefer. The smallest of risks is n
218 BigPhilNYC: As I've said in the past, I've been a big supporter of DM through the transition, and have tried to calm people down and open them up to the thought t
219 Lanpie: I have been uploading photos to AN for over 5 years and I am not happy when I read the new rules about the usage of the photos witth DM. Of what I can
220 Metroliner: I don't understand... how is such a retroactive move even possible? I mean, since all of those images were uploaded under a different ToU, then how is
221 TransIsland: That's an interesting point, especially where it concerns photographers that are no longer around. Does anybody here know who inherited the copyright
222 Ander: This makes sense to me Tim. I'm sure we can all wait a bit and see. I recommend everyone to go out and have a fun sunday with friends and family. For
223 Metroliner: Nice sentiment, but I can't help feeling that those people who have an actual investment in this site in terms of photos on this site - like yourself
224 Odo: As I see it, the damage to trust has already being done and the fact that DM isn't addressing this issue right _now_ isn't helping. This situation is
225 Dimage: Hi, I think TransIsland has made a very good point, what about photograpers like Air Nikon or Frank Schaefer who can't descide themselfes if they agre
226 Dvincent: If he was married, they would go to his wife.
227 Dvincent: Tim; You've got my trust because I've never had a reason to believe that you aren't fighting for us. My trust in Demand Media, though, will take a lo
228 Tappan: Hi Spencer and everybody, I guess what I meant was that, in a worst case scenario with DM going through with these new rules, then a good solution mig
229 Eksath: The vast collections of the late Mr.Air Nikon and late Mr. Frank Shaeffer would have to be deleted unless the lawyers include a clause that takes a n
230 Stil: And what's more... What if somebody doesn't connect to A.net in a month? Can you imagine when you are back and realise all YOUR pictures aren't yours
231 Mirage: Do you think is that difficult to click in each photographer here: http://www.airliners.net/about/photographers.main and copy/paste an alert message
232 ZagAbe: Hi. This is my first post - I haven't been here in a long while and I didn't know that I was able to post in Aviation Photography forum and I haven't
233 Ljungdahl: As I understand it, from a Swedish aviation forum (among others) the avalange of e-mails requesting the deletion of photos from the DB have already be
234 Samuel32: If I were A.net I would react fast and release a revised ToU or a statement/comfirmation which indicates that the TuO will be changed, because in 24 h
235 JeffM: Tim, if that is the case,they should remove them right now until they can be written properly. How hard is that?
236 BigPhilNYC: As mentioned, the word "distribute" would have to refer to third party sales. You don't distribute media to yourself. That is one of the most concerni
237 Ptrjong: Thanks for pointing that out. Still, I think Florian's reconstruction of events in Reply 234 may not be so far from the truth. Yes, I'd almost say th
238 Viv: If you accept the new Terms of Use they apply to all your uploaded shots, not just the shots uploaded after your acceptance of the new ToU. Once you
239 Tbird: Jeff its not hard to remove those terms, it seems it was easy to put them in...but the fact is the crew is clearly not running this site anymore but
240 Ptrjong: I understand that the Terms say this, but I think that may be simply illegal. I don't think I can give them copyrights on my old shots simply by cont
241 Djipibi: with a little more than 700 pics on A.net, I consider there are many hours of my work at stake here. If no modification comes about, I'll pull out of
242 Spencer: This is actually freaking me out now, considering the time and effort I've put in to this site. I'm assuming everyone else feels the same by the amoun
243 Kukkudrill: Paolo Emanuele has said he is going to fix things. I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt and wait in the expectation that he will do so. I
244 APFPilot1985: Still waiting for something Paolo.
245 Lennymuir: I've been sharing e-mails with a few a.net buddies today who have read this chaos but haven't, can't or won't post on this thread for whatever reason
246 GOCAPS16: Yea, I don't think I can wait that long. I really wish I didn't have to delete all my photos also, but I gotta do what I gotta do if nothing is solve
247 UA935: With all due respect do you not think that the photographers of this site and the content of this thread have provided a summary to DM that explains
248 NIKV69: I know that Chris, but I can read between the lines. Good point Phil, I have probably never in my life punched a clock and worked 9-5 M-F. Not to men
249 LTU932: Excellent idea. That way, there would be enough time to revise everything not just with legal, but also with the photogs and other members. Check you
250 Bruin787: just a question... is there anything in the current TOU that says they must give you a certain time frame before implementing changes to the TOU? I'm
251 Tonimr: The same from my part... mostly, but not only, from Spanish photographers. We're totalling many thousand photos and roughly twenty million visits.
252 JRadier: Tim, not regarding how much I would like to believe that I just can't at this moment. This is a see first/believe second deal now.
253 Skyliner: I've sent the following in reply to the e-mail message that I received from DM: I have reviewed the proposed terms of use, and they are not acceptable
254 Vishaljo: Craig Murray is handling Frank Schaefer's works. He knows about what's currently going on.
255 Paulinbna: The same thing from most of the photographers associated with Nashville.
256 PHBFA: Same thing from many Brazilian photographers including myself, summing up thousands of pictures and millions of views. Bernardo [Edited 2008-02-10 10
257 Gunships: The silence is deafening. Anyone else imagine an answer planned for 3 weeks, six days, 23 hours, and 59 seconds from now? Although I'm not a photogra
258 DeltaAVL: I'm gonna be rational here - I don't think photographers need to remove their photos. Yet. Hopefully we'll see a significant change in the next few da
259 Fly747: That's how I have felt for the longest time, but the dishonesty from DM and thinking everybody is stupid is insulting to say the least. I am starting
260 DeltaAVL: To be fair, I don't think there's really anything they can say. They know no more information that we do. I'm certainly losing respect for A.net as e
261 Boeingfreak: Hi all, I just had the idea to inform all airliners.net photographers about the upcoming changes. Thanks to the design of the "Our Photographers"-page
262 Gunships: I agree with you, however this thread seems to be a departure from what has become the moderating "norm" recently and I think it's refreshing. I spea
263 Ryangooner: Regardless of any decision i feel the damage is done, certainly by the underhand tactics. Will somebody issue an appology?, Will someone take responsi
264 Ptrjong: Please, this tread is about photographers' rights, not about moderation. But of course the volunteer crew are not happy with DM turning the site into
265 Eksath: If this thread gets deleted or edited down by the management, they can kiss thousands (even hundreds of thousands) of pics goodbye. It will be the fi
266 Key: Florian, I'm not sure that is a good idea. A.net has sent out a message to all, that landed in the same inbox as you would be using in your plan. Ther
267 Lennymuir: Yup, if there is no correction, there won't be many/any screeners left either... right?
268 Whappeh: That will hurt them with new uploads too. I'm a relatively new shooter when it comes to Aviation photography. I shoot landscapes primarily, and do lo
269 Codeshare: Looks to me like Granite is gone. KS/codeshare EDIT: Sorry misread. Delete post if necessary. Someone is gone anyway.[Edited 2008-02-10 12:05:05]
270 Crank: Does DM really think thousands of photographers are willing to ??? I'm not one of them and if the situation does not change I will not hesitate to hav
271 Navigator: If A:net is eroding photographers copyright I think it will only be a matter of time before Jetphotos.net has altogether taken over the handling of th
272 AGD: I've been following this thread for a while now. I have to admit that I'm really surprised that such a serious Internet company wouldn't consider the
273 Paulc: Have not uploaded photos here for a while but stil have over 2000 inthe database which will be deleted before the deadline. a.net is rapidly going up
274 Lijk604: It say's it's time for me to pull my measely 35 photos as well.
275 AKE0404AR: Who we are? Airliners.net is the biggest and most visited aviation interest site on the Internet, logging over 80,000,000 page-views from 900,000 dist
276 ZagAbe: http://www.airliners.net/termsofuse/ now start with "WE HAVE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND HAVE DECIDED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE THE IMPLEMENTATION O
277 Deradere: Well, now there are. I just took my stuff and left... well I am trying to leave. I don't know how long it will take since there will be millions of e
278 DeltaAVL: ??? So you go just as we're starting to make some headway here?
279 Aloges: I suppose they'll want to discuss this with "legal" first since it would be easy to get entangled in a giant legal mess. But yes, the old TOU clauses
280 Jetmatt777: Sorry you had to leave, but I'm behind you man, I'm thinking of taking my stuff and leaving right now. Even if(when) the ToU changes, I will be very
281 KLM772ER: If it is really a fight between DM and the photographers and will stay this way, than we the photographers can't win! If there isn't a real solution
282 Lijk604: Nothing from Paolo and it's 4pm EST on Sunday. Questions have been posed to him & Monique and they have not been addressed. Extremely disturbing.
283 Mclaudio: Once again...I know that we are in the middle of a turmoil, but...still no email here. Not even on the junk mail box.
284 Jetmatt777: We have one tool that we have that DM doesn't, that's our photos, we can Demand (pun intended) our photos to be removed if it doesn't change, we can
285 Bottie: I'm awaiting more explainations from DM untill I decide if I'm pulling my pics out of the database or not. But from what I've read, I think it pretty
286 Chris78cpr: I totally and 100% agree. Good move by someone who gives a damn about the people who use his site! Again i totally agree with Simon. The damage has b
287 Silver1SWA: Exactly right. That is exactly what I was thinking. If things don't change, and fast, we are looking at enormously devastating consequences set off i
288 Key: As we speak, the new ToU have been replaced by the old ones, with the extra message above. There could be hope. Erik
289 Maiznblu_757: This is a mass reply as I am sure that those few who have contacted me are staying tuned to this thread and will see it. Please stop sending me PM's a
290 Walter2222: ...but browsing through this thread, a lot of damage has already been done. It is a sad day for aviation-photography! I do trust the screeners/photog
291 Dvincent: What people are threatening to do is delete their photos from the database itself. I have been mulling yanking my currently 12 shots in the queue but
292 Mygind66: DM, Paulo, Monique I've been out of A.net for half a year... but your new rules, if not changed in 1 or 2 days will end your business. I'll wait, me a
293 Ptrjong: Yes, Bram (Bottie), this is about bigger things. Our beautiful a.net is a great place where we all spend (too) much time, with great people behind th
294 Bottie: I think I didn't make myself clear (blame the midnight-hour ) I was just referring to the fact I've seen saying lots of people they will take their
295 Ryan h: After reading this thread it shows that demand media are starting to wake up to their big mistake, but there is still a very long way to go. Terms 'Po
296 Jetmatt777: a)He probably bought his own island in Dubai and is sitting in a lawn chair with a 6 pack next to him with a cigar in his mouth watching the boats go
297 BlackProjects: Well a Can of Worms got opend and its led to a real mess. I hope it all settles down again but it will be ages before it rearly settles down. Matt i t
298 FelixMayer727: My deadline is Wednesday! Then I take decision about my 1100+ pics in the DB! Currently they are gone! So DM, take the right decision and scrap the ne
299 Flynavy: This is nothing but Demand Media switching over to "damage control" mode! The fact is that any new members (and thus photographers) have ALREADY agre
300 Beechcraft: Same here. Nothing to add to this... We know a major mistake was made here, the only reason i can think of right now is, that no one expect maybe for
301 Whappeh: I think we all want to stand by the website. We just don't want to see our work get stolen from us by a corporation. I know I've spent years trying t
302 APFPilot1985: According to Monique, she herself spent weeks personally reviewing the TOU with the legal team. Yet again what are we to believe from DM?
303 JonathanJet: I'm relatively new here - the past several years. This is a extremely discouraging point to a photographer who was just getting started and excited ab
304 Cpd: I asked a colleague who is a lawyer, and her thoughts were the same as my initial ones. The new ToU (which I've saved for future reference) is quite
305 Warbirdz: Way back in thread 150 or so. The comment about the Legal team wanted this implemented ASAP. Why, what do they need to get through so quick, why could
306 Monteycarlos: Tim, unfortunately whilst I agree with you, the provisions made in the TOU don't provide for that kind of 'intention' being honoured. Whilst I also t
307 Jawed: The thread should be renamed to "New Terms - What It Means For A.net". It means that the community on A.net may go somewhere else.
308 Aviasian: Since receiving the disturbing e-mail, I have been reading every single post - and taking time to digest and comprehend the emotions, intentions and j
309 Deeplight: I"m very moved by the last post. Aviasian has reached into this dark quagmire and sounded the hope bell. Thank you for reminding us of the true magnit
310 Calfo: Hi guys I'v been away this weekend, and couldn't keep up with the thread. It would be to long for me to read all the replies, so heres my question: Si
311 ZagAbe: Hi. Paulo, thank you for your response, seems honest. However, you did not answer a few questions posted before: 1) How come Monique claimed that she
312 Tappan: Paulo, Glad you chimed in here in the last few minutes. We photographers take our copyright very seriously. Let's hope a.net continues to forever gran
313 APFPilot1985: We heard that about the INtellitext ad's, and then the migration. When does it end? Still you have failed to address the inconstancies between what y
314 Flynavy: Two increasingly valid points that, regardless of the outcome of the Terms of Use debacle, still need to be addressed.
315 QANTAS077: the situation should NEVER have popped up in the first place, whoever came up with this bullshit is either a fool or was hoping that the uploading pu
316 NIKV69: Being a little dramtic aren't we? Isn't the motto shoot for yourself and not airliners what I have heard for 4 years? Now just because the new owner
317 N1120A: Not to mention that the dissent on this site has already been silenced multiple times, with post deletions unexplained by e-mail and the locking of t
318 Propfreak: hi all, exactly my opinion - would hate to plug all my 2000+ pics of the DB cheers olav
319 Flynavy: Don't think I could have said it better.
320 TimdeGroot: Hi All Took me while to keep up with all the new posts...phew. I think a positive step has been made in the right direction. The TOU has been pulled a
321 Mclaudio: Ok...wouldn't it be better for both parts if some sort of agreement could be reached? It is in the best interest for DM that this site makes money, on
322 Kukkudrill: Thanks for quoting me Olav. Saved me the trouble of digging that up from deep in the thread! Paolo, I think most photographers are ready to put this
323 Navigator: What will come up next in the "Learning curve" of Demand Media ? Isn´t it time someone took time and explaned to them what this site is all about bef
324 DavestanKSAN: Damn fine post, great job. I think that sums up my position quite nicely I'd say. I'd recommend the folks at DM read that post very carefully, a lot
325 LeadingEdge: Spot on Charles. The fact that this is only to apply to existing members suggests that the new terms are really where Demand would like to be. Unless
326 Ptrjong: Exactly. Of course, it also contradicts Paulo's assertion that it's all just a mistake.
327 Stil: I hope so. At least, the thread doesn't grow at the initial speed. Maybe it's time to calm down. This has been an exciting weekend as we all are very
328 Monteycarlos: Tim, I must thank you, Denis and Royal for being supportive of us as a whole. It would have been very easy for you as crew to tow the company line bu
329 CPHaviation: I just wonder why, when you ask for you photos to be deleted, that nothing happens??? No answer to your emails or anything. How hard can it be to dele
330 Mmniemi: They just need to say that in those exact words in the forthcoming(?) yet another new TOU. Although I'm happy with Paolo's last message. Thanks to hi
331 INNflight: Unfortunately...for me that's the main point at all. I've been following the new "implementations" (say: intellitxt crap) by DM quite closely since t
332 Silver1SWA: But Nick, it's really not a stretch at all. The way those terms were written clearly stated in legal terms that photographers were losing their right
333 Viv: Quoting Paulc (Reply 15): Unfortunately DM have undone most of that hard work with all the recent problems and the attempt to get control of all the p
334 Flynavy: Precisely. And if Demand Media's lawyers insist on not rescinding the Terms of Use - which isn't that far fetched considering all of DM's web sites s
335 Metroliner: We don't need 'angels' - we need the old ToU back on the site. Furthermore, if it must be rephrased for whatever reason - though God knows that the o
336 Viv: Or, to put it another way, when you're in a hole - STOP DIGGING! DM have totally blown their remaining credibility as far as I am concerned. Let us s
337 EMA747: I have just come back to this thread to see too many new posts to read through. Can someone do a brief summery in plain English and not legal jargon w
338 Viv: The new Terms of Use have been withdrawn for now - meaning that the old Terms of Use are still valid. Expect revised New Terms of Use in the next cou
339 Lennymuir: Viv, turn it around the other way. If the guy high up in the DM food-chain realises they won't get what they want, the alternative might be lights out
340 Viv: Could happen. I believe this ToU exercise was driven by a desire to increase revenue - perhaps the site is not as profitable as DM had estimated init
341 Kukkudrill: We're not simply going to be presented with fresh terms of service as a fait accompli. We're going to be consulted in advance. It's what a.net's new
342 Acontador: Hi All, For me, as for most of you, this has been a terrible weekend. It makes us all very sad to see what has happened to our Airliners.net! The firs
343 Key: Serious requests like the deletion of someone's photos are no doubt handled with the greatest care. If not, anyone forging an email address could jus
344 PITIngres: I believe you are being unnecessarily pessimistic. I have no inside knowledge, but I'm pretty sure this is simply default lawyering. Lawyers (at leas
345 Viv: In my 25 years working for a multi-national entity, I have seen lots of first drafts that were equitable to both contractual parties. Yes, and this i
346 PITIngres: My fault for not making my thought clear. I've never seen a fair first-draft contract when legal was not given directives otherwise. Certainly when c
347 Viv: I take your point, and you are right. I notice that DM currently has an opening for a General Counsel, whose responsibilities will include supervisio
348 F-WWKH: If you do not want your pictures to be used for anything - don't upload them or upload them somewhere else. Anyway, someone else will upload that phot
349 Farcry: Having read this thread with a heavy heart, I just wonder if our wonderful friends from Russia are aware of the turmoil on A.Net. I don't upload any p
350 KFLLCFII: Still waiting myself. And I'm not interested in what the new TOU has to offer, even if it's more favorable.
351 Clickhappy: If you choose to have your photos deleted they will be deleted. There are a couple of technical issues to work through. While both the crew and Demand
352 N737ER: I have been keeping touch with this thread since it was brought to my attention Saturday morning. Even though I have a couple of pictures on anet, the
353 Graphic: Also still waiting. A response to the e-mails would be nice.
354 KarlADrage: When I read that the new TOUs had been withdrawn for current members as of last night (at least in the short-term), I was quite happy with that, howev
355 Stil: It doesn't matter. How many times do you tick the "Yes, I accept" button without reading a word of it?? I must admit I never check anything, although
356 AC320: Part II- New Terms - For Photographers - Part II (by Flynavy Feb 11 2008 in Aviation Photography) Archived for length
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States, joined Oct 2003, 1591 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2667 posts, 
From Guam, joined Jun 2005, 150 posts, .gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jan 2007, 573 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 358 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Jan 2005, 137 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3654 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 1518 posts, 
From France, joined Dec 2005, 55 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2629 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
