I got some email!

I got an interesting note in my email inviting me to join this outfit -- anyone heard about it?

http://www.photocompet​itor.com/

Have you explored this? The earn money part and try us free has me wondering. I got an email once from some gallery in New York telling me how they admired my work. Yeah right. You get to hang your work in their gallery - for a price. I did a background check and it turned out they were a bit sketchy. Apparently they did well and you did not.

Let us know if find more info. Thanks

digital paradise wrote in post #16757849
Have you explored this? The earn money part and try us free has me wondering. I got an email once from some gallery in New York telling me how they admired my work. Yeah right. You get to hang your work in their gallery - for a price. I did a background check and it turned out they were a bit sketchy. Apparently they did well and you did not.

Let us know if find more info. Thanks

Well, I don't typically wade into such things...I'll let the email sit and stare me in the face for a while...the idea of paying into more outfits for...whatever...I dunno! I do pay for use of my Web host (PBase), in fact that's what evidently drew this guy's attention, but there's a difference between someone seeing an image and wanting to pay for it (or, I've done some stuff for non-profit outfits)...and someone wanting you to pay them for use of your image(s)!

Wow, Arthur, speak of the devil, err, I mean, speak of the Admin, well, of the guy who emailed me!

I see that you are new to POTN and that this is your first post! So, how exactly did you see my stuff on PBase? I'm asking because I really haven't been very active with my photography in recent months, haven't posted new stuff in PBase lately, and even though I've been more active on FaceBook I've still fallen off there in recent weeks!

edit to shorten, sound scammy to me

Have you read the TOS?

http://www.photocompet​itor.com/tos

There is no way I would agree to 2.2

neacail wrote in post #16759276
Have you read the TOS?

http://www.photocompet​itor.com/tos

There is no way I would agree to 2.2

That's actually a pretty standard clause for photo sharing sites. Check Flickr, 500px, etc and you'll see it there as well.


Tony, I got one of those e-mails a while back as well. After looking at the site for a while I decided to pass on it. You'd have to be fairly popular on there to actually make any money (and it wouldn't be much), assuming the community grows to a point where there is enough traffic. It's an interesting concept, just not for me.

1.1.2 - No. I will not agree to pay for "all possible expenses" incurred simply because someone registered a complaint. Way too broad of a clause there and not a chance of agreeing to that.

1.3.8 - An individual is still a company if they are registered and their paycheck comes from their photography; if this site is supposed to be for displaying portfolios, which is what folks use to promote their body of work, then most mom&pop wedding/event/"people" photographers are out.

2.2 - Not a snowball's chance in hell; while it may not be intentional, the way this is worded is nothing but a complete rights grab by the site that would allow them to use any user's photos for paid purposes with no recompense to the author. Reasonable usage is already covered in 2.1.

4.4 - So, you see other photographers' work on other websites and send them mails inviting them to your site; but call it a contract violation if someone does the same with your site? No.

EDIT:
Flickr's TOS is governed by Yahoo; reviewing their TOS shows that they do NOT include the same sort of right grab for photo/video content posted to the site:
"b. With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo Services other than Yahoo Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo Services solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo removes such Content from the Yahoo Services."
"c. With respect to Content other than photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo Services other than Yahoo Groups, the perpetual, irrevocable and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed."
Snipped from: https://info.yahoo.com …/yahoo/utos/uto​s-173.html Section 9.

Scatterbrained wrote in post #16759288
That's actually a pretty standard clause for photo sharing sites. Check Flickr, 500px, etc and you'll see it there as well.


Tony, I got one of those e-mails a while back as well. After looking at the site for a while I decided to pass on it. You'd have to be fairly popular on there to actually make any money (and it wouldn't be much), assuming the community grows to a point where there is enough traffic. It's an interesting concept, just not for me.

I only use Photobucket. While they have a similar clause, the clause excludes images that are not marked "public." None of my images are marked public, though I can still link to them and display them other places on the web (like forums).

the whole concept seems a bit stupid to me. Once they have a couple thousand members posting 10 pix a day there's no way anything is gonna go to the top unless the poster uses their friends to 'like' things. And then what? You get an other month of posting or maybe $50? LOL, all that for $130/year?

And the admin is apparently searching the web or his stats to find any mention, signs on and posts a strange defense of this 'great' idea here. Nothing looks right about this here.

Arthuro30 wrote in post #16759943
How many photographers as much opinions. We respect each of them.

I suggest you respond to Eric's questions about your T&Cs if you realy want people to join your schame.