Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 20 Posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1954 times:
Hi all,
The page containing the new Terms of Use now starts with the following phrase:
Effective Date: February 8th, 2008
WE HAVE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND HAVE DECIDED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW POLICIES FOR PRE-EXISTING USERS. WE WILL REVISE THE POLICIES TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE CONCERNS WE HAVE RECEIVED. THIS IS A PROCESS OF COLLABORATIVE RULE-SETTING. WE LISTEN TO OUR MEMBERS AND WILL ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS.
Only a 'postponing the implementation for pre-existing users' is not what we want, of course. This could mean anything.
Interestingly, no apology.
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Eksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1139 posts, RR: 27 Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1945 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW ARTICLE EDITOR
I am not uploading anything more until this mess is finalized PERIOD.
Kukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1122 posts, RR: 5 Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1875 times:
Why only for pre-existing users? Do DM still plan to subject new users to the new terms of use? I don't like this. Hopefully things will get sorted out this coming week so I won't comment further. But I hope DM are aware that they have lost photographers' trust and that they have to be fully open and transparent with photographers if they want to win it back.
Charles
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1860 times:
If they really meant it, they would have changed them, not just add that silly blurb.....
Jetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2661 posts, RR: 36 Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1784 times:
You don't have to work at Jiffy Lube to figure that out.
It's not that hard to write up 3 new paragraphs. All you have to do is say that the photographer own the copyright, and his pictures may be used in Airliners.net publications at his concent/discretion with some sort of payment, wether FC credits or PayPal money, or cash. And that DM can link to the photo either with an image thumbnail link, or text link, and the photographer will still get credit. DM may use it in an Airliners.net or MyAviation.net ad, with concent of the photgrapher, and if the photographer says no, you don't use the pic.
You pay a legal team what a 14 year old can do? Is that where all this money goes to? Johan wasn't a lawyer or in a law school (IIRC), he wrote up a good ToU that everyone agrees to, but a full paid legal team can't make one up that not even 1 single photographer agrees to?
And make it clear where we and everyone else knows what it is stating, not some legal language, that only 350 dollar an hour lawyers can interpret.
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11122 posts, RR: 63 Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1763 times:
Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 8): Johan wasn't a lawyer or in a law school (IIRC), he wrote up a good ToU that everyone agrees to, but a full paid legal team can't make one up that not even 1 single photographer agrees to?
Could that be because Johan wasn't trying to 'stitch us up' I really do not like the new conditions, my pictures on both sites will be going if the rights of the photographer are not upheld, what DM appear to be doing is nothing short of robbery.
They've restored the old Terms now: Airliners.net respects the copyrights and other intellectual property rights of others
But the silly blurb is still worrying.
I thought a fresh thread would be a good idea, but people haven chosen to continue to post in the old one, so this one has become pointless. I'll not ask that it be removed or locked, because that might reek of censorship. However, it's probably better to post in the other thread: New Terms - What It Means For Photographers (by Flynavy Feb 8 2008 in Aviation Photography)
Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
MidEx216 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 651 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1419 times:
Good news. There would be a void without A.net
Quoting Eksath (Reply 2): I am not uploading anything more until this mess is finalized PERIOD.
Same here, but if it doesn't change promptly, I still may pull.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1409 times:
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 10): They've restored the old Terms now
But for how long? That's the question, along with the one about whether the old TOU will retroactively apply for signups on and after February 8th, because judging for the note, it only applies to those who registered before February 8th.
QANTAS077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5745 posts, RR: 49 Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1374 times:
Quoting Ptrjong (Thread starter):
WE HAVE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND HAVE DECIDED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW POLICIES FOR PRE-EXISTING USERS.
just as I thought, this whole process was DM testing the waters and the limits of the photographers that make this site the db that it is.
a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
TimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 67 Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1295 times:
There's no way old photogs will keep their rights and new signups won't. Everone has to keep their rights and they will. Otherwise we'd never get any new photogs.
Let's see this for what it is, a step in the right direction. Yes, several things still unclear but I'm sure everything will be taken care of soon.
Paulc From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1490 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1233 times:
sorry guys but the whole set up stinks - DM are really pushing their luck with the members of this site and it will / has rebounded big time. It took Johan years to build up the site to a level that other non aviation companies would be interested in buying. Unfortunately DM have undone most of that hard work with all the recent problems and the attempt to get control of all the photographs is beyond belief. Yes they are having to backpedal fast but it is too late, the damage to the site's reputation has been done and trust from photographers has been lost. If they can try this now what is to stop them trying the same in the future despite Paulo's words.
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 20 Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1214 times:
Quoting Paulc (Reply 15): If they can try this now what is to stop them trying the same in the future despite Paulo's words.
Well, our answer will be the same every time until common sense prevails at DM HQ. If they want a thviving website, they gotta respect photographers' rights. Easy.
I'm not giving up on a.net yet.
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, RR: 31 Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1188 times:
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 photographs is beyond belief. Yes they are having to backpedal fast but it is too late, the damage to the site's reputation has been done and trust from photographers has been lost.
I fully agree. I will pay no attention to soothing words from DM, but will reserve judgement until any new ToU are presented in the future. Talk is cheap, but legal texts matter.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
FYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 576 posts, RR: 16 Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1168 times:
I think it would be a great deal if DM will exclude the page with the 'New terms' from the site until the new 'New terms' will be presented. Still presenting it makes people nervous - if they are skipped - what for are they?
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1139 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1624 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1122 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8357 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11122 posts, 
I really do not like the new conditions, my pictures on both sites will be going if the rights of the photographer are not upheld, what DM appear to be doing is nothing short of robbery.
From China, joined Jan 2004, 5745 posts, 
From Russia, joined May 2005, 576 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
