New A.net upload terms Photogs need to read

You may want to read the following regarding A.nets NEW upload terms. Their new terms allow them to use and sell your pictures without any credit or royalty to you. Let the uploader beware.

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.

---

That's f'in ridiculous.

Before we get started here, keep the expression of your opinions here civil, no matter how angry anything pertaining to Anet might maker you. There are to be no blanket anti-Anet statements, no profanity, or name calling.

Voice your thoughts about this change, if you'd like, in a mature manner, please. I just don't want this to get out of control.

-Phil

This really does concern me. They said that they will explain more on Monday, so I'll avoid any reactions until then.

I wonder what their plans are.

I wonder what kind of backlash this will have. Heck, I only have 35 pics there, which if pulled off the site would be nothing, but if some of their "power" users were to not agree to this and pull their pics...WOW!

It was only a matter of time, Johan was in it for the love of aviation. Demand Media, as we now see, is in it for the money.

I do not care what they "explain" it is layed out there what the deal is PERIOD. According to this, they can use or sell your images to the media or any other sources. They can say anything like (NOT A QUOTE FROM ANET) "we only are using it for the website and not other media...but then can LEGALLY sell your image of an aircraft to the media. If a plane crashes and you took a pic, they can do whatever they want with it LEGALLY. Imagine seeing your images in a book of the best airliners.net images or on every TV after a plane you photographed crashed.

WOW, Jetphotos will soon pass Anet as the main Aviation website because the professionals will not have that!

This is gonna get good!

Oh wow! Talk about losing control of your photos.... Johan would have never came up with that idea

Quote:

---

Their new terms allow them to use and sell your pictures without any credit or royalty to you. Let the uploader beware.

---

As Tim DeGroot alluded too in the thread Chris started I doubt this is the case. I will wait until DM clarifies it.

Quote:

---

WOW, Jetphotos will soon pass Anet as the main Aviation website because the professionals will not have that!

---

I know that has been the feeling since DM bought anet but I doubt it. I also doubt you will all be pulling your pictures from there come Monday but as Phil stated it would be better to wait for clarification early next week.

I agree with Nick and Phil - I'm waiting for the clarification from DM on this.

I think its pretty clear based on the email that A.net just sent out. That reads the same way as what Chris posted. After March 8th if Demand Media wants to use your shots in a revenue generating nature they can without your knowledge or permission. How that is not clear to anyone is beyond me...

I agree with Tom, they can say what they want, but if they make a very large book with the best of Anet and sell it, You can do nothing....reguardless of what they clarify.

that came as a shock to me, and if they're sticking to this policy then i'm going to want my pictures off. there is no way i'm going to agree to forfeit my copyright just to have my shots up there! [/angry]

(sigh)
i want to know more, waiting for monday to come around....

Went to airliners.net & many people seem to be shocked as well, the Photo Screeners/Moderator are asking for patience, but, seems that they are equally in the dark....

This posting was interesting:

Quote:

---

So, let me get this straight...

You don't have a problem letting Demand Media...

Use...
Reproduce...
Modify...
Transmit...
Distribute...
Publicly display or...
Advertise in, on, or around one of your photos...

All while not being able to guarantee that they will give you credit for the photo?

---

Sure, wait till more information is passed on, but, it does not sound good & I am the one that usually tells everybody to relax......

I got that email as well and read it. This is completely ridiculous!

I, too will wait for DM to clarify, but if their clarification does not satisfy me, I will take my photos off that site, even though I don't have that many. I will also encourage all of the A.net photographers to do the same thing as well.

But still, we should not jump too quickly to any conclusions without the clarification.

I'm not really sure what they could say in a clarification that would make this any better, except to say "Oops, those aren't the real terms, what we meant to say was..." because with terms like that, it doesn't matter much how they say "we probably won't do that," the fact is that the terms are a lot more binding than that 'promise' would be.

It seems pretty cut and dry to me. I will never upload to ANet again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wunaladreamin

It seems pretty cut and dry to me. I will never upload to ANet again.

---

I agree and I will also be removing the ones I have up as of current abait that number is small. I spend the money for the equipment to take the pics, put the effort and than they have the right to make a profit off of it. Nope that flys like a brick with me.

Wow, Jetphotos.net owner Chris Kilroy sent a great letter to all photographers today, good marketing on his part! He changed the Jetphotos.net terms of use to basically address all the A.net terms, the change is quoted below:

Quote:

---

By uploading your photos to this web site, you grant JetPhotos.Net a non-exclusive license to display your images under the .jetphotos.net domain name. JetPhotos.Net will not, under any circumstances, use your copyrighted images in any other way. We will not barter, sell, trade, or otherwise use your photos for the benefit of this web site or any other entity, and if you wish to remove your images from the JetPhotos.net site at a future date, we will accommodate your request in a timely fashion.

---

GREAT decision by jp.net, I expect to see a mass migration to JP.net if DM does not change those terms.

Here is the full email:

Quote:

---

Dear JetPhotos.Net contributing photographers:

In light of some recent developments in the aviation photography community, I felt that I needed to personally write all of you to reaffirm our commitment to protecting your rights as a photographer and copyright holder.

Firstly, while the scope of our usage license was always implied, we have added some specific text to our Photo Usage Terms, which you can see here:

http://www.jetphotos.net/photousage/

This additional text serves one purpose -- to put in writing the policy we've always had regarding use of your photos. In layman's terms, this policy states, uncategorically, that we assume no ownership rights of the photos you upload to JetPhotos.Net, that we will never use your photos for any purpose other than displaying them on the JetPhotos.Net website, and that if, in the future, you decide you no longer want to display your photos on the site, we will remove them from our database, no questions asked. Your photos belong to you, and how you want them to be used is your decision, not ours.

If you feel that we can change any aspect of our Photo Usage Policy to further benefit you, the photographer, please let me know personally by replying to this e-mail. I'd be very interested in hearing from you!

I hope this e-mail has reasserted our commitment to protecting your rights as individual photographers, and indeed the rights of the entire community. From myself, and the entire team at JetPhotos.Net, thank you for allowing us to display your images, and we look forward to serving you in the future.

Kind regards,

Chris Kilroy
Editor, JetPhotos.Net
http://www.jetphotos.net

---

That is seriously a refreshing change from the A.net/DM way of doing things. Thanks JP.net and Chris!

I'm really curious to know what Johan makes of all this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wunaladreamin

I'm really curious to know what Johan makes of all this.

---

He's too busy counting the money he made from the sale to worry about it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moose135

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wunaladreamin

I'm really curious to know what Johan makes of all this.

---

He's too busy counting the money he made from the sale to worry about it...

---

Was that ever disclosed? Is DM a public company (I.e. has to report financial statistics)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nwafan20

Was that ever disclosed? Is DM a public company (I.e. has to report financial statistics)?

---

They are a private company. I've heard rumors about the number, which I won't repeat, but if they were at all accurate, Johan is living quite comfortably these days.

This is what I posted on Anet:

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 that this could be a good thing for the hobby.

Now, for the first time, I'm having seconds thoughts.

First, as mentioned, it is very sad, and perhaps downright frightening, that screeners had no idea that this was coming. The lack of communication is a horrible sign of the site's new operation. That alone is huge cause for concern. I recently changed the rules on my own site, and I think I might have even over-communicated with my team. That's how you run such a site.

As for the new terms here, I will still give them the benefit of the doubt until they explain in more detail on Monday. However, even if their intention is to not really exercise what they wrote, and only put it their for unforeseen protection, then they will most certainly need to re-word it. Many people will have no tolerance for wording that makes it easy for them to do as they please with others' creative works.

One can't even say that we are interpreting it wrong. It really is pretty clear. DM's intention, though, is what we need to hear, and they need to address our concerns accordingly, or they clearly will stand to lose hundreds of shooters, and surely hundreds of thousands of killer photographs.

This is perhaps the biggest shakeup in the hobby since I've gotten involved in it. I've never seen so many shooters get so upset, and so ready and willing to leave en masse like this. In fact, I am almost insulted that DM is not coming in on the weekend to address this ASAP....as the ****storm is clearly in full swing.

Something I've always said; "If you don't explain something, people are left to assume the negative". How DM can post something like that, with no explanation, and not be around for several days is shockingly and completely reckless.

However, I am sorry to say that regardless of their true intentions, I don't know if I can leave my photos on this site with that kind of verbage present. My above points add to the distrust and concern.

This is the kind of thing that digs your own grave.

Phil, I don't think there's anyone that could have said it better.

very well said phil, and i'm sure that most photogs on that site share the same sentiments you wrote about.

The fact is DM is handling this totally wrong..Any large company that has upset its "Shareholders" so to speak would have stepped infront of this with in the first 24 hours an put a stop in place. In this case that has not happened. All you see are people saying "Please be patient." Monquie lied to the entire community by saying it took them weeks to write this, yet Florian pulled the same terms off DM's older sites. As for interpretation...lets get serious...the terms are very clear. They can use your photos as see fit, you don't need a translator to interrupt that.

If they were serious about calming things down the GM of DM would have stepped in and categorically said the verbiage would be removed pending further review and no change to the current TOU's would be made. That hasn't happened. Why?

The fact is the crew of A.net is nolonger running that site, instead they serve as mere custodians. This fact is very evident given it was member who brought the new TOU to the light of the crew. What does that say for DM's opinion of the crew? Not much... The crew members should be up in arms over there demanding answers as to why they were blindsided. This is business 101...you do not change a policy or procedure without first informing your staff...simple as that and this raises serious questions to the management and competency of Demand Media.

Sorry Phil, but I frankly do not care about any explanation from them. Explanations do not hold up in court...the contract does. They really miffed up good and pissed off most of their users. Start the egg timer, ANET is now about to die! This will make them a minor player next to Jetphotos. I am glad that I do not have any photos as I would have pulled them already. I do not want clarification on a contract that I understand takes all the rights from the photographer. I am soo glad I do not need to request the photos pulled.... I am grabbing some popcorn! As for all you guys that have photos uploaded. I am really sorry about the turmoil you now have to deal with. In a few days when 60% of the uploads die, that is when you will really start to see the beginning of the end. Even if they revert to the old way...they lost most of the confidence of their submitters.

I printed out the entire thread from Anet....all 70 pages, and went through it post by post.

I agree. It's not acceptable. Even if they fix it. There are so many things wrong with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Derf

Sorry Phil, but I frankly do not care about any explanation from them. Explanations do not hold up in court...the contract does. They really miffed up good and pissed off most of their users. Start the egg timer, ANET is now about to die! This will make them a minor player next to Jetphotos. I am glad that I do not have any photos as I would have pulled them already. I do not want clarification on a contract that I understand takes all the rights from the photographer. I am soo glad I do not need to request the photos pulled.... I am grabbing some popcorn! As for all you guys that have photos uploaded. I am really sorry about the turmoil you now have to deal with. In a few days when 60% of the uploads die, that is when you will really start to see the beginning of the end. Even if they revert to the old way...they lost most of the confidence of their submitters.

---

Fred I think you hit the nail on the head. Regardless if they correct the TOU they've lost confidence in a good deal of their submitters and some big name submitters to. The key is having confidence in a company and the lack of concern by DM over the last 24 hours is truly an example of poor customer service. I don't think however A.net will "die" its been around far to long and most of the sites visitors probably have no clue what is going on and will continue to visit the site. Over the past year a large number of big names have left A.net and the site still is strong. However I do know for a fact the sites growth has slowed dramatically when compared to JP.net who's growth has more then doubled in 2007. As an example only two years ago a top of the day at JP.net was something like 500 views, today that number often times is 10K plus.

Quote:

---

The fact is DM is handling this totally wrong..Any large company that has upset its "Shareholders" so to speak would have stepped infront of this with in the first 24 hours an put a stop in place

---

But we are not shareholders Tommy. We have no stake in the site and are pictures are uploaded voluntarily.

Quote:

---

Monquie lied to the entire community by saying it took them weeks to write this, yet Florian pulled the same terms off DM's older sites. As for interpretation...lets get serious...the terms are very clear. They can use your photos as see fit, you don't need a translator to interrupt that.

If they were serious about calming things down the GM of DM would have stepped in and categorically said the verbiage would be removed pending further review and no to the current TOU's would be made. That hasn't happened. Why?

---

I think it is plain to see their terms are generic, Paulo basically tipped their hand and said this would be done. I just don't feel that the wording was designed to give them sole right to start stealing our photos. Then again it's open to interpretation and the negative intrepretation will always win out when it comes to anet.

Quote:

---

The fact is the crew of A.net is nolonger running that site, instead they serve as mere custodians.

---

The crew run the day to day operations. Once Johan sold out I think we all knew that DM would be the last word. No matter what kind of compnay changes hands and keep whomever the owners are always going to have the last word. Nobody on the crew is going to have any say in the legal guidelines of the site. That is not unusual. Was it wrong to make those changes to the TOC without notice to the head screeners? Sure, but they don't own the site. Keep that in perspective.

Quote:

---

Fred I think you hit the nail on the head. Regardless if they correct the TOU they've lost confidence in a good deal of their submitters and some big name submitters to. The key is having confidence in a company and the lack of concern by DM over the last 24 hours is truly an example of poor customer service. I don't think however A.net will "die" its been around far to long and most of the sites visitors probably have no clue what is going on and will continue to visit the site. Over the past year a large number of big names have left A.net and the site still is strong. However I do know for a fact the sites growth has slowed dramatically when compared to JP.net who's growth has more then doubled in 2007. As an example only two years ago a top of the day at JP.net was something like 500 views, today that number often times is 10K plus.

---

I am a little distressed with your low opinion of the sites visitors Tommy. It couldn't be that maybe they didn't interpret the wording of the TOU the same way some have? I still have seen absolutley no proof of DM having any intentions of using our pics in a way that would be detremental to us or the hobby. I also would point out that your stat about JP though probably true doesn't reflect the growth of anet and proof that it is slowing. Consider this stat, two years ago the range of people on the site at any given time was between 0-500. A slow period would be 150-200 and a busy period would have 350-500. Now at the busy periods I have seen 900+ on at the same time. Also you have to remember that anet's forums are much more popular than JPs. Where some of the die in the wool users on anet never even pick up a camera but still go to meets and spot. All of these people pay money and generate revenue for DM. So as far as I see it I am pretty sure DM will rewrite the TOU and things will continue as normal. I still see many of the big names still uploading their work there and I am pretty sure it is safe from DM just doing whatever they want. I could be wrong but I suggest we start a topic on this in 6 months and use actual proof and see what is what.

Well the new terms have been "postponed indefinitely"

http://www.airliners.net/disclaimer/

"It is our policy to terminate in appropriate circumstances an account or the access rights of a subscriber for repeated copyright infringement, and we also reserve the right to terminate a account or subscriber for even one instance of infringement. "


ahahaha, yet this is what they wanted to do to the sub's ahahahah :borat:

Great job guys!!! I will no longer look over there, I want no part of giving them any views. Wow, for leadership...they win the darwin award.

"WE HAVE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND HAVE DECIDED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW POLICIES FOR PRE-EXISTING USERS."

But new users????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by njgtr82

Well the new terms have been "postponed indefinitely"

http://www.airliners.net/disclaimer/

---

Don't feel comfortable, airliners.net has the right to change the rules whenever they want, that too is also on their website.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NIKV69

Quote:

---

The fact is DM is handling this totally wrong..Any large company that has upset its "Shareholders" so to speak would have stepped infront of this with in the first 24 hours an put a stop in place

---

But we are not shareholders Tommy. We have no stake in the site and are pictures are uploaded voluntarily.

---

Tommy used the word "Shareholder" as a way to say that you own a piece of airliners.net & most people that are a part of airliners.net pay or have paid the fee to be a part of airliners.net. You are not just a customer as you have a vested interest in the success of airliners.net....

Shareholder, as a legal owner of part of the concern's equity, no. Stakeholder, as a holder of an interest in the concern's success, yes.

Two quick notes:
1.) Terrible PR move by releasing it on a Friday and then saying they'd explain everything on Monday. It's let a whirlwind of anger develop over the last 48 hours with nothing to stop it.
2.) We all knew this was coming. DM was trying to get a hold of a content base to leverage for future revenues. Even if you read the original thread here when Demand bought a.net, the arguments foreshadow what eventually happened.
Under normal circumstances, I'd pull my content, but I started uploading right around the time of the original sale, and "pre-pulled" any of my material by not submitting it in the first place.

Yes Mike that is exactly what I meant but you know some people interpret things in different ways. I mean didn't ALL of us interpret these rules wrong according to some? I'm not sure how we did...if we did why would they have taken them down? If we were all wrong then one would think the rules should stand, right? I'm probably interpreting that wrong to. You know A.net should have a spokesman to help clear things up for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T-Bird76

You know A.net should have a spokesman to help clear things up for us.

---

If they did they probably wouldn't be back in the office til after the weekend anyway.

Well...

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.

I wouldn't say Demand is evil, they are simply morons. A.net is not DailyPuppy.com, where people are uploading un-edited photos of their stupid dogs wearing Santa hats from the Kodak EasyShare grandma got them from Wal-Mart for Christmas. I love that "Monique" claims to have spent weeks going over this with their legal team to ensure everyone would like it. Either a.)she's lying, b.)she's a complete idiot who has no concept of what their users need, or c.)she gave the lawyers ideas that would be agreeable to us and the lawyers were just like "LOL yeah, right, whatever."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GothamSpotter

Well...

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.

I wouldn't say Demand is evil, they are simply morons. A.net is not DailyPuppy.com, where people are uploading un-edited photos of their stupid dogs wearing Santa hats from the Kodak EasyShare grandma got them from Wal-Mart for Christmas. I love that "Monique" claims to have spent weeks going over this with their legal team to ensure everyone would like it. Either a.)she's lying, b.)she's a complete idiot who has no concept of what their users need, or c.)she gave the lawyers ideas that would be agreeable to us and the lawyers were just like "LOL yeah, right, whatever."

---

My guess would be D.) All of the above.

I'm still over them.