Getty's free image embedding comes at a price


Of course free ain’t actually free.

1 Like

" And when you gaze long into a .gif the .gif also gazes into you."

Terms And Conditions #146

1 Like

Trolling doesn’t help whatever point you’re trying to make.

At BB, we pay to use JPGs from Reuters’ photo wire, but it’s unlikely we’ll use Getty’s free embeds much at all.

1 Like

That was pretty funny. Good job.

You were trying to be funny, weren’t you?

This is just sad. You made up nonsense about how we don’t pay for stuff, your assumptions turned out to be wrong, and that’s why you’re behaving like this.

We have used Getty images. And are happy to have paid for them. Getty’s embeds, as explained in the linked EFF article, have a few problems that YouTube doesn’t, but I imagine we’ll use them now and again.

See? It’s not the disagreement. It’s the inane hostility. I say “we won’t use them much” and you hear “won’t use them”. That is why you are said to be trolling.

I mean, you’re basically being told to grow up here by me. That, if nothing else, should be very embarrassing for you.

1 Like

To be fair, you don’t actually seem to understand the internet. This quote from your original post kinda sums it up:

(emphasis mine)

They didn’t create any software. They added an extra layer of abstraction on top of the plain old internet (which is all that you need to embed photos), which you are required to use so that they can collect user data from your readers. That’s what the complaint is here. They say they’re letting sites use their photos for free, but they’re not. They’re collecting (extremely valuable) user information in exchange for letting sites use their photos.

“A cheap, lazy rhetorical gimmick to save you from the trouble of really thinking”

Encore, encore, Free Bird!!! [holds lit zippo overhead, throws roses and panties at the stage]

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.