02-17-2021, 09:33 PM
pRICE cUBE wrote:
[quote=AllGold]
I don't know how it ultimately works out, but I do know among professional photographers this is a continual controversy because services like Twitter, Instagram, etc. are always, ALWAYS trying to pull this crap with their TOSs that say if you post it on our service then we can do anything we darn well please with it. I don't know if that attempted theft really extends to all their users or just the service itself.
In my opinion, it's part of a larger problem where corporations with their army of lawyers create excessive contracts and TOSs against regular people who don't have an army of lawyers.
You said what I was about to say. It will be interesting how courts rule on this.
I'm not an expert, but apparently part of the question in this case is about whether the photo was republished using a Twitter embed tool, in which case the image would have linked directly back to the original tweet/Twitter user account. I believe Twitter does require this in some cases of republishing (probably when it's a commercial use), which insulates it against the content creator complaining that their work is being reused without attribution.