Bio not provided
Thanks for including the "Ugly" post. ;) I never even thought about the irony of the FB shares. That's too funny!
5 months, 3 weeks ago on Monday Roundup: Facebook Tips for Business
@yvettepistorio I FEEL your pain. I went through a very similar situation a few weeks ago (Honestly. I'm not just saying that to relate or make you feel better). Without going into details, I will tell you that it was rough and I learned more in that 48 hours than I have in any other PR/blogging/social media experience in my life. Luckily, I had @shonali by my side and her level-headed approach kept me grounded and focused. She went to bat for me - which was huge considering we only met as a result of this "situation." The whole experience was pretty uncomfortable but, just like yours, my community was there for support. Now that I'm no longer sleep and food deprived, I am grateful that I got to go through that hellacious situation. I learned a lot about myself and even though I came out the other side shell-shocked, I was still kicking. Keep kicking, keep writing, keep having confidence in your abilities. We're all in this together.
7 months ago on A Blogging Community: Why it’s Important to Have One
@ShaunDakin @PrivacyCamp What a fascinating article! Thank you for sharing.
7 months, 1 week ago on The Ugly Side of Social Media Sharing
@Johnny40TThis comment you made is not accurate: "You also must have discussed the issue with her after the fact because you have since blurred the children's faces which were not blurred before." As indicated in the original post and the update, "Susan" gave me permission to use the images.
Additionally, I believe the sentence that you are quoting from "Facebook's website" is being used out of context. According to https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms, "Sharing Your Content and InformationYou own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:
@Johnny40T Thanks for your comment. As indicated in the update, "All images have been used with “Susan’s” permission. In her words, “…I appreciate the fact that you all are doing this to get it out there to show people how easily photo[s] can be taken without your permission.” ~SB"Also, while I am not a lawyer, I disagree with your assessment that "Facebook owns the pictures once you upload them and they can do with them as they wish." I've provided additional details on Facebook's TOS in my conversation with @partymomma below.
7 months, 2 weeks ago on The Ugly Side of Social Media Sharing
Hello @Irony, Thank you for your comment. As indicated in the update, "The following post was edited on May 1, 2013, to redact the names of the websites and related Facebook Pages involved. Since the identities of the particular parties involved in the incident described below are less important than the issues raised, we decided not to subject them to further scrutiny.
We have made minor edits to the post as indicated below that do not change its integrity, including blurring the faces of the kids involved. We have redacted the Page name(s) from any comments mentioning them, and will continue to monitor comments to do so."I would like to also reiterate that unlike some of the places that chose to use this photo without permission from "Susan," I had permission to use these images from Susan in this way.
@Sheli Rodney Great question. I can only speak for myself but I know how I would feel if an image of my family went viral in a similar way -- hurt and violated. I love seeing pictures of my friend's kids online, but I understand why some choose not to post. In my opinion, it's a hard call because we want to connect and share our lives with friends and family.
@KimRandall Your comment about contests is an interesting point. While I'm not saying it is right, I feel like celebrities are a bit different because they are considered public figures. I think the hardest part about this situation is that "Susan's" privacy settings were in place. I agree with your bottom line - think before you post.
Hey @TomMahoney, Thanks for your comment. I think you make a valid point. As indicated in my introduction to the post, I am a social media advocate. I believe that online communication is important for businesses and individuals. I want to see people sharing/posting/Tweeting/commenting/liking/you-name-it, but all with an understanding of copyright.
@Ameena Falchetto Thanks for your comment. I agree on the education component. I think there needs to be a better understanding of online image copyright and privacy. I'm hopeful that we will see changes soon.
@Joshua Wilner/A Writer Writes Do you have the link? I would love to read the article.
If you read down a bit further in Facebook's TOS it says - "5. Protecting Other People's Rights
@partymomma Thanks for your comment. Can you elaborate on why you believe "Facebook owns the image" and "can sell it"?
@Blackfish Is that a voice of experience with Getty Images? ;)I agree with your statement about watermarking photos for company pages, but I think it might be harder to get a basic social media user to add a watermark all the time. It's an added step. But if Facebook and other social media sites build an image classification structure like Flicker has -- you might get buy-in. Might.
@John Barnett Rude.
@MattLaCasse @jenelleconner @Daniel J. Cohen I could see removing the Save As function from Google images as well as Facebook. I still come across clients who don't understand why they can't just use an image pulled from Google.
Thanks, @Daniel J. Cohen. I just made this comment on Facebook - "...I also feel like we need to make sure people understand that online images aren't "free" for the taking. The main problem was Susan's friend's boyfriend thinking it was okay to download the image and upload it on a public domain site. I think there is a lack of education, or maybe enforcement, when it comes to online images." Great extended question. I feel like we are heading toward a a big change in the enforcement of copyrighted images and how they are utilized online. It might take a nasty lawsuit to make it happen, but I believe it is coming. @MattLaCasse mentioned removing the "Save As" function on pictures. That might be a good start.
Does anyone understand the "logic" behind the "fair use for educational purposes" comment by [redacted]? I get the public domain comment because of Imgur, but I don't see how it is educational or why that idea was even introduced. I know I am trying to apply logic to something that isn't logical, but that sentence always bothered me. Can anyone help me understand?
Susan spent hours/days contacting the pages, making the requests and working to get them to remove the images. She was about ready to give up when we finally found the original image on Imgur. It was a long trail. Imagine how many people don't have the time, guts or resources to make it happen. I'm proud of her for all of her efforts. I would love to know the answer to @lauraclick's question. Is there such thing as "proper recourse" in this situation?
Thanks, @John Barnett. Your last comment is priceless. Ha! I'm still having a hard time wrapping my brain around [redacted]'s message/philosophy that keeping it up was more important than Susan's request. Why create negative PR? Just take it down! It was a fluke that Susan even saw the meme. I wonder how often this happens to people without them even knowing and how many people give up on a request for removal when they hear things like: "We can appreciate the request [Susan], and you may proceed as you wish, but we will not be removing the image...This is the nature of digital media. Sorry.”