How do these fauxs get so much business?!?!

[cameraclicker]

Hi Ink!

Facebook Terms have an interesting clause:

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

 

If your content was shared with others, the FB license continues beyond your deleting the content.  This implies a copy is made, and controlled by whomever the content was shared with.  In this case content was shared with 500px users (not Flickr as stated in your post).  Beyond FB, US copyright contains the concept of Fair Use which allows a photo to be used for critique, criticism or education, among other things without the copyright holder’s permission.

The posts here and on her page explain a lot about how the alwaysnforeverphotography mother’s photos got onto 500px, where quite frankly they look out of place.  Posting them there is an interesting exercise as I see they have received some likes and even a fave!  Although anyone could have clicked those buttons.  If she is really upset, her recourse is to post a DMCA take-down notice with 500px.  I doubt anyone else cares enough to oppose the take-down notice so they would in due coarse remove the content.

In her collection, Uni & Kate Alimi / Albanian Wedding Day 2, she has the comment:

Such amazing events…events I have never seen before! Events I was not event prepared for!! Kate and I have talked over many occasions including coffee, and hours of chatting.

The true statement is:  “Events I was not event prepared for!!”

While her’s are not the worst photos we have seen many of her photos need work to reach mediocre.  So many of them have flat light and blown out backgrounds.  Featureless people as subjects.  White dress on white bed cloths, with out of focus shoes, is just not good.  I down loaded one of her photos and ran it through my printer, thinking it looks a bit like mine after the extra brightening is applied for the printer.  What printed looked a lot like it did on my monitor, so that theory is trashed, along with the print.

A bully is: a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller or weaker people.
A critic is:  a person who judges, evaluates, or analyzes literary or artistic works, dramatic or musical performances, or the like.

Comments about her making mistakes and displaying photos of poor quality don’t make PhotogSlayer a bully.

[Don]

They’re cheap and people these days don’t know good photography when they see it. Case closed.

[Author]

Posts