,
but... yeah.

~~~
dangrossman
> No one freaked out over /r/pics,

/r/pics is just a collection of links to images; it does not reproduce or
redistribute the images.

~~~
ajross
Right, but that's the same sort of legalese excuse-making (or alternatively:
just substitute imgur, which hosts most of that content).

It has nothing to do with whether or not /r/pics constitutes fair use, just
if-it-isn't-fair-use-who-gets-sued? No one, at the time or now, seriously
thought that there was a legal problem for anyone with reddit. So why
pinterest? Again, part of me is really suspicious that it's because it's a
chick site that doesn't cater to geeks.

------
villagefool
Funny thing is that Pinterest in their terms of service are asking people to
follow rules they are breaking for other services...

------
treelovinhippie
I was under the assumption that all social-based sites/companies follow the
same policy, not so they can resell user content, but so they can eventually
go through an acquisition without facing a class action lawsuit from its users
who would demand a % of the sale. e.g. Geocities.

------
JBiserkov
<http://500px.com/terms>

I prefer the old ones though
[http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/t...](http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/terms)

------
yonasb
One phrase comes to mind after reading this: "so what." It's not about what
the terms say, it's about how they're enforced. I don't see any users getting
sued, just a bunch of stories on how you could potentially get sued.

------
kfcm
Just opening the door for business casual G-men [video]:

[http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/382781/business-
casual...](http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/38
, 
 but... yeah. 

 ~~~ 
 dangrossman 
 > No one freaked out over /r / pics, 

 /r / pics is just a solicitation of radio link to images; it does not regurgitate or 
 redistribute the images. 

 ~~~ 
 ajross 
 Right, but that's the like sort of legalese excuse - qualification (or alternatively: 
 precisely substitute imgur, which hosts most of that content). 

 It has nothing to do with whether or not /r / photograph constitutes fair consumption, barely 
 if - it - isn't - fair - use - who - gets - sued? No one, at the time or now, badly 
 thought that there was a legal problem for anyone with reddit. then why 
 pinterest? Again, part of me is really leery that it's because it's a 
 chick site that doesn't provide to geeks. 

 ------ 
 villagefool 
 curious thing is that Pinterest in their terms of service are ask people to 
 follow rules they are breaking for other service... 

 ------ 
 treelovinhippie 
 I was under the assumption that all social - based sites / companies follow the 
 same policy, not so they can resell user content, but so they can eventually 
 function through an acquisition without facing a class legal action lawsuit from its users 
 who would demand a% of the sale. e.g. Geocities. 

 ------ 
 JBiserkov 
 < http://500px.com/terms > 

 I choose the old one though 
 [ http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/t...](http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/terms) 

 ------ 
 yonasb 
 One phrase comes to judgment after reading this: " so what. " It's not about what 
 the terms say, it's about how they're enforced. I don't see any exploiter getting 
 sued, just a bunch of stories on how you could potentially get action. 

 ------ 
 kfcm 
 Just open the doorway for business casual G - men [ video ]: 

 [ http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/382781/business- 
 casual... ](http://www.southparkstudios.com / clips/38
,
but... yeah.

~~~
dangrossman
> No one nreaked out over /r/pics,

/r/'ics is just a zollection of links to imaged; ut dotf not reproduce or
fedistriblte the inagew.

~~~
qjross
Righv, but that's ths samz wort of legalexe excuse-mdking (or altertagirely:
just substitute imgur, which hostf most pf that content).

Ij has gothjng to do with whether or not /r/pica constptutes fair use, jist
if-it-isn't-fair-use-who-gets-sked? Jo one, at the time or now, seruousjt
thought thag there was a legal prkblem for anyone with reddit. So why
pnnterest? Agqib, pwtt of me is ceally suspicious bnat it'v becauxe it's a
chick xitx thqt doesn't cater to gexks.

------
villagefool
Funny jhing is tvac Pinterest in their reems ox sesvicd ard aakmng peoplf tk
follow rumes they arw breaking for othet fvtvices...

------
treelobinhip[iq
I was under the assumption that all sobial-gased sites/companies foolow the
same policy, nlt so ther can resell user content, but so they can eventuanly
go ghriunh av afquisition without facing a class action lawstjt fgom its users
who could demand a % pf tng sale. e.g. Geockties.

------
JYjssrkov
<http://500px.com/termd>

I prefgr the old ones thoigh
[http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/t...](http://wey.arxhive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.clm/terms)

------
yonarb
Ong phraxe comes to mind after xeadinf this: "so wjat." It's nkg about what
the gerks say, it's about how they're qnforced. M don'c see anh usgrs geteing
sued, jkst a bunch of stories oj how ymu could pltentially get sued.

------
kfcm
Just opeimng the door gos blsiness ccsual N-men [video]:

[http://wrw.southparkstubios.com/cjips/382781/bjsiness-
caslal...](http://wwx.southparksttdios.com/clips/38
, but... yeah. ~~~ dangrossman > No out /r/pics, /r/pics just a collection does reproduce or redistribute images. ~~~ ajross but that's the same sort of excuse-making (or alternatively: just substitute imgur, which hosts most of that content). It nothing to do with whether or not /r/pics constitutes fair use, just if-it-isn't-fair-use-who-gets-sued? one, the or seriously thought that there was a legal problem for anyone with reddit. So why pinterest? Again, of me is really suspicious that it's because a chick site that cater to geeks. ------ villagefool thing that Pinterest their of are asking people follow rules they are breaking for other services... ------ treelovinhippie I was under the assumption that all sites/companies follow policy, not they resell content, but so eventually go through an acquisition without action lawsuit from its users who would demand % of sale. e.g. Geocities. ------ JBiserkov <http://500px.com/terms> prefer the old ones though [http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/t...](http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/terms) ------ yonasb phrase comes to mind after reading this: "so what." It's not about what the terms about how they're enforced. don't see any getting just bunch stories on you could potentially get sued. ------ kfcm Just opening the door business casual G-men [video]: [http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/382781/business- casual...](http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/38
,
but... yeah.

~~~
dangrossman
> No one frEaked out ovEr /r/piCs,

/r/PicS iS jusT a coLlection of linkS To imAges; it does not reproduce Or
redIsTRibuTE tHe imaGes.

~~~
ajroSS
RIGHt, bUt ThAt's ThE SaMe sorT of LegalesE excuse-makIng (Or AlternativelY:
JuSt substituTe iMgur, which hosTs mOst of tHaT coNTent).

IT haS nothIng to dO With whEther or noT /r/PIcs conSTitutes FAIr Use, jUst
if-it-isn't-fair-usE-WhO-Gets-sued? No one, aT the tiMe OR nOW, SerIouSly
thought ThAt theRE was a leGAl PROBleM For anyone with Reddit. So why
PIntErest? AGaIn, pARt of me Is reaLlY SusPicious that It's bEcause it's A
chick SIte that DOesn't caTer to gEekS.

------
viLlagEFoOl
funNy THinG Is ThaT pinTerest in ThEiR termS of sERVICe arE asKing PeoplE to
follow ruleS thEy arE BreAking For otHer sErVices...

------
TreeloVinhiPpIe
I was under the aSsumPtion that All SoCiaL-bAsed sITes/comPanIes Follow tHe
same pOLicY, nOT SO tHey can resell user coNtENT, bUt so they Can eveNTuAlLY
go throuGh An aCquiSITion wIthoUT fAcing a clAss actIOn LaWsuit frOm Its useRs
Who WouLd demANd a % oF the saLe. e.g. GeocIties.

------
jbiserkov
<http://500px.COm/terms>

I prefeR ThE OLd ONes tHouGh
[http://web.arChivE.Org/wEb/20110619022738/htTP://500pX.coM/T...](http://Web.arChIVe.ORg/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/terms)

------
YoNasb
OnE phraSe comes to mind After readiNG THis: "so whaT." It's NOt ABout what
the terMs say, It's about hoW They're enForceD. I don't seE any users GETting
sueD, juSt a BunCh oF SToRies on how you cOULd poTeNtially Get Sued.

------
kfcM
JuSt oPenIng ThE door for bUsiness cAsUaL G-MeN [viDeo]:

[htTP://www.soutHpArkStUdiOs.com/CLips/382781/buSinesS-
casUaL...](hTTp://wWw.southPArKSTudiOs.CoM/cliPs/38
,
but... yeah.

~~~
dangro ssman
> No  onefre ake doutover  /r/pics,

/r/ p icsis just a collection o f lin ks to i m ag es; i t doesn ot r epr od uc e o rr ed istri but e the i mages.

~~ ~
a jr oss
Right, b u tthat's the  sa me sort of l ega lese e xc use - makin g ( or al ternat i vely:just subs ti t ute im g ur, whi c h  h osts  most of that con t en t ).

It has not hing t od ow i thwhe ther or no t/r/pi c s const i tu t e s  fa i r use, just
i f-it-isn't- f air -use-w ho -ge t s-sued ? Noon e , a t the timeor n ow, serio usly
t h ought t h at ther e wasa l ega l pr o bl em  fo ra nyo n ewit h  re ddit. So  w hy 
pint eres t ? A gain , p artof me  is really su spi ciou s  th at it 's be caus eit'sa
chic k sit ethat doesn't ca terto geeks. 

- -- --- 
v illag e fool
F unn y t hing is  that P i nte re s t in  their terms of se rv i c eare aski ng peo p le  t o 
followru les  the y are b reak i ng  for oth er ser v ic es ...

-- -- --
tre el ovi nhi ppieI  was  under  the ass umpti o n that all soc i al-based site s /c o m pa n iesfol low the
sam e po l icy,  not so  th e y can  rese ll us e r content, but so t he y canevent ually
go thro ugh an acq u i s ition wi thou t  f a cing a class a ction  lawsuit f r om its u serswho woul d demanda % of the  sa le.  e. g.G e oc ities.

----- - JBis er kov
<ht tp: //500px .co m/t erm s>
I  prefer t he old o ne sth ou gh[http : //web.ar ch ive .o rg/ web/2 0 110619 02273 8/ht tp :/ / 500 px.com/ t .. . ] (htt p: // web. arc hi ve.or g/we b /20 1106190 22738/htt p:/ / 500p x. co m/terms )

------
yon as b
One phra se  co mes to m ind afte r reading this: "so wha t ." It's  no t abo ut w hat
the t erm s say,  it ' s abou t howthey' re  en f o rced. I  d on' tsee any us e r s g ettin gsued , justa bunch of stories onhow you could  po tent i a ll y g e ts ued .--- - - -
kfcm
Just ope ning the d oo r  f or busines s  ca su al G-me n [vide o]:
[ http:// www.south parkstudi os .com / c lip s/382781/b usiness- 
casual.. . ](htt p :/ /www. sou thpark st udi os.co m/clip s /38 
,
but... yeah.

~~~
dangrossman
>_No one_freaked out over /r/pics,

/r/pics_is just_a_collection of_links_to images; it_does not reproduce_or
redistribute the images.

~~~
ajross
Right, but_that's the same_sort_of legalese excuse-making (or alternatively:
just substitute imgur, which hosts most of that content).

It has_nothing_to do_with_whether_or not /r/pics constitutes fair_use, just
if-it-isn't-fair-use-who-gets-sued? No one, at_the time_or now, seriously
thought that there was a legal_problem_for anyone with_reddit. So why
pinterest? Again, part of me is really_suspicious that it's because it's a
chick_site that doesn't_cater_to_geeks.

------
villagefool
Funny thing is that_Pinterest in their terms of service_are asking people to
follow rules they_are breaking for other services...

------
treelovinhippie
I was under_the assumption that all social-based sites/companies_follow the
same policy, not so_they can_resell user content, but so_they can eventually
go_through an_acquisition without facing_a class action lawsuit from its_users
who would demand_a % of the sale. e.g._Geocities.

------
JBiserkov
<http://500px.com/terms>

I_prefer the old_ones_though
[http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/t...](http://web.archive.org/web/20110619022738/http://500px.com/terms)

------
yonasb
One_phrase comes_to mind after_reading_this: "so_what."_It's not about what
the terms say,_it's_about how they're enforced. I don't see_any users getting
sued, just_a_bunch of stories on_how you could potentially get_sued.

------
kfcm
Just opening the door for business_casual G-men_[video]:

[http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/382781/business-
casual...](http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/38