7 thoughts on “Instagram: Does It Matter That It Will Make Money on Your Pics?”

  1. I don’t use Instagram, it being just one of dozens of photo sharing apps out there, no better or worse than any other in my opinion. Besides, I include a disclaimer in all my creative work that essentially states that I retain all rights to my creative work and that my wording trumps any other policy, rule, etc. to the contrary no matter when such policies or rules took effect.

  2. This policy must be reversed. The U.S. government has established the Federal Copyright Law specifically to protect personal ownership of artistic works and intellectual property. Just because someone wants to share their work with the world doesn’t mean they want a company to resell it without compensation. The most dangerous aspect of this is that some will agree to it and do not realize future implications. I suspect if they don’t reverse this voluntarily, the U.S. Copyright Office, Federal Trade Commission, consumer groups and creative industry associations will reverse it for them.

  3. if instagram offered users a portion of the revenue received for their photos, assuming those photos were purchased by someone, then that might placate the user base. analagous to the apple app store rev share split. it also might encourage more use of the service and more creativity. self-tagging by users of image type and how it might be used in hopes that the image(s) might be looked at and chosen by a potential buyer might even occur. why not turn it into a real market where all ships are raised, rather than making such a "perceived" one-sided approach?
    Or, offer the right of refusal to users for a fee. if you would prefer not to participate in the free option, pay an annual fee of $5 or $10?
    I will be expecting a % of the revenue if they use either of these genius ideas.

  4. Flatly disagree. Everything that comes out of a person’s head—prose, poetry, artwork or phtographs, music, performance videos—everything—belongs to that person under Copyright Law of the United States.


    The idea of a business model built on the violation of copyright is both illegal and obscene. The idea of a business model (Facebook) built on acquiring billions of eyeballs with no thought of monetizing it at the outset was stupid. In the words of Agora entrepreneur Bill Bonner, “The only bank that takes eyeballs is the eye bank.” This very week Morgan Stanley was fined $5 million


    “to settle allegations that it skirted rules designed to promote the independence of stock analysts.” And, of course, Facebook clobbered investors who went for the $38 IPO. Today the stock is listed at $27.79. In short, Facebook is a joke.

  5. When your teenage daughter’s picture in a bikini ends up on a site like istock.com and is then used to promote a porn video, you may feel differently…

Leave a Reply to steve m Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *