Is putting your pictures on a Pinterest Business account a REALLY bad idea?

Hi,

So, this morning I got an email from Pinterest asking me to convert my current page to a "business" page, and then the Terms of Service caught my eyes:

http://business.pinter​est.com/en/business-terms-service

"You grant Pinterest and its users a non-exclusive, royalty-free, transferable, sublicensable, worldwide license to use, store, display, reproduce, re-pin, modify, create derivative works, perform, and distribute your User Content on Pinterest solely for the purposes of operating, developing, providing, and using the Products. Nothing in these Terms shall restrict other legal rights Pinterest may have to User Content, for example under other licenses. We reserve the right to remove or modify User Content for any reason, including User Content that we believe violates these Terms or our policies."

I don't remember this being in the normal users' TOS, so not sure if this is only for business pages or what. But to me, this sounds like they, and the rest of the world, can do whatever they dang want--right? The part that's tripping me is "for the purposes of operating, developing, providing, and using the Products." Not sure if this is limiting their use?

Since I'm not a lawyer, I am hoping for some more educated opinions on what the TOS means to an artist pinning his own work.

Here's a good article on general personal accounts, written by a photographer who is also a lawyer, but he doesn't talk about the terms I posted above, which makes me think they are new:

http://ddkportraits.co​m …erest-inspiration-boards/

So two questions:

1. If this is specific to business accounts, is it a bad idea to post your pics on business accounts?
2. Should I not post my pics on any accounts at all, business or individual?

Thanks!

It's similar or worse for facebook. Since I see you have a facebook link, I wouldn't worry too much.

I think the language used is required for regular business use if they will host the images on the site and from there your images may get pinned and shared in all sorts of places on and off the site.

juicedownload wrote in post #17118740
It's similar or worse for facebook. Since I see you have a facebook link, I wouldn't worry too much.

I think the language used is required for regular business use if they will host the images on the site and from there your images may get pinned and shared in all sorts of places on and off the site.

thanks...

and i am weary of facebook's policies too. i only post links on my facebook account to my picture hosts and do not host any pictures directly on their site that i worry about losing. this is their terms:

"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it."

i believe if all i post is a link to my webpage, they can have all the license they want to use that link for all i care. or is that the wrong interpretation?

i believe that's similar to the policies on potn as well--links to others' stuff is allowed but you can't host others' pictures directly without permission.

however, it appears that pinterest is a bit different. all their stuff are links. they don't host anything at all other than your comments. so, given that, i am worried they expect the terms cited to apply to the pictures they pull via the links and not the links themselves.

I am not overly worried Facebook is going to run away with my lo-res pictures . I would interpret the terms and conditions the same way as you - that if you post a link, the link is subject to the IP policy but the website isn't.

Otherwise it will never hold up in court. If I post a link to - lets say - the Coca Cola website, is Facebook suddenly the owner of all Coca Cola online presence? I think not! Or, would someone give your IP to Facebook by linking your website on Facebook after an amazing photoshoot and they want to link you to your friends? I should think not!

For sure, these policies are made up so people can share pictures left and right. Facebook would have a monster problem on their hands if they didn't have the policy in place and someone would request a picture to be taken down. This is their way to protect themselves. I can image Pinterest is the same.

If you're scared about it why not upload the lo-res images and keep the hires ones safe on your computer? I think you are giving away the rights to the lo-res image and not the photograph and all the intellectual property that went in it (composition, lighting, exposure, etc...). Meaning I think Pinterest would have the IP rights to one instance of your photograph - the lo-res one - and can't claim anything about the hires one you keep for any use.

The whole point to facebook is to get your clients to run away with your photos. It is some of the best WOM you can get depending on the genres you shoot.

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #17119545
The whole point to facebook is to get your clients to run away with your photos. It is some of the best WOM you can get depending on the genres you shoot.

yes... and though i really hate how facebook's sharing works, the most annoying thing turns out to be its greatest asset for protecting content:

it will always preserve your link.

that is, no matter how you try to thwart its system, it will always place the link in shares. depending on how the share is activated, it might wipe all context and comments and description, but it will always share the link as you posted it in the first place.

and thus if you interpret facebook's TOS to mean that they only have rights to the link posted, and not the content behind the link, the owner of the content will keep all rights.

the problem here is that Pinterest is ONLY LINKS. and i want to know whether their TOS applies to the content behind the links. that is, if you pin your own picture, does Pinterest now have all the rights they spoke of in their TOS applied to the picture itself???

Xyclopx wrote in post #17119561
the problem here is that Pinterest is ONLY LINKS. and i want to know whether their TOS applies to the content behind the links. that is, if you pin your own picture, does Pinterest now have all the rights they spoke of in their TOS applied to the picture itself???

The simple answer is if you don't like how something works don't sign up for nor use it. If you don't agree to their TOS or the fact they may change those TOS whenever they like then avoid using the service. I.e. control your own content by only hosting it on places where you have full control over it such as your website.

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #17119610
The simple answer is if you don't like how something works don't sign up for nor use it. If you don't agree to their TOS or the fact they may change those TOS whenever they like then avoid using the service. I.e. control your own content by only hosting it on places where you have full control over it such as your website.

... of course.

but the whole point of this thread is to ask what their TOS means, so i can determine whether it is safe to use a Pinterest Business account, and Pinterest in general.

i googled this stuff, and as mentioned in the first post, a lawyer commented on some of the other terms, but apparently not the same version of the current business terms. i could not find any comments via google about the terms cited for a "business account."

you can compare yourself: the language used as i quoted in the first post is very different than what the lawyer is talking about.

Their language will be different next week too, and the week after that. The TOS changes more than I change my underwear. The best place you can go to to find out (and have some reason to trust) what the current TOS means is a lawyer (ideally one specialising in copyright).

If the TOS worries you that much I wouldn't rely on the information you get back from random folk on the Internet on forums as you'll get several unqualified views.

memoriesoftomorrow wrote in post #17119654
Their language will be different next week too, and the week after that. The TOS changes more than I change my underwear. The best place you can go to to find out (and have some reason to trust) what the current TOS means is a lawyer (ideally one specialising in copyright).

If the TOS worries you that much I wouldn't rely on the information you get back from random folk on the Internet on forums as you'll get several unqualified views.

you should probably change your underwear more

... while i agree, i don't need the perfect answer... i was hoping for more like:

1. 500px = safe
2. facebook = probably safe if you use only links
3. etc...

...
#. pinterest = avoid???

i would think this topic is of great interest to many on this board, since pinterest is a great way to get publicity, but probably not at the cost of losing your rights.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17118726
The part that's tripping me is "for the purposes of operating, developing, providing, and using the Products." Not sure if this is limiting their use?
1. If this is specific to business accounts, is it a bad idea to post your pics on business accounts?
2. Should I not post my pics on any accounts at all, business or individual?

Yes, just as with FB, the License granted to Pinterest is limited to use on their system. It isn't FB or Pinterest stealing your images that you have to worry about it is other users.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17119740
Yes, just as with FB, the License granted to Pinterest is limited to use on their system. It isn't FB or Pinterest stealing your images that you have to worry about it is other users.

thanks

a little off topic, but as for facebook the applicable tos is:

"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it."

it's a little different than pinterest's in that it says "you grant us... license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook." doesn't say how they could use it. i think that basically says if they wanted to use them on a totally different website then they can. no?

pinterest's says "You grant Pinterest and its users a... license to use... your User Content on Pinterest." so, i guess that means the content can't be used outside of pinterest.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17119789
"you grant us... license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook." doesn't say how they could use it. i think that basically says if they wanted to use them on a totally different website then they can. no?

No. "....on or in connection with Facebook". Using your content on another site would fit that.

Put simply these companies provide users with a sharing service and make money from advertising. If they took your content and started selling it or using it on some other site FB would empty over night. They would lose far more in ad revenue than they would make from the few photos etc that are actually worth anything.

Use low res images and add a watermark. The watermark will help you get exposure from people sharing your images. The watermark will also prevent FB/PT from use your images outside of the typical use on the website.

Dan Marchant wrote in post #17120344
No. "....on or in connection with Facebook". Using your content on another site would fit that.

Put simply these companies provide users with a sharing service and make money from advertising. If they took your content and started selling it or using it on some other site FB would empty over night. They would lose far more in ad revenue than they would make from the few photos etc that are actually worth anything.

yeah.... I now see this statement can be read 2 ways:

1. "you grant us... license to use any IP content that you post, ----> [to use] on or in connection with Facebook"

or

2. "you grant us... license to use any IP content that you: post on or [POST] in connection with Facebook"

i guess #1, the way you read it, makes more sense. not sure how this kind of stuff is resolved in court.