Pouring through my ever overflowing RSS reader tonight I came across a post on AppScout by Alan Henry about Flickr Fight. This is a site that allows you to search for two terms, and then determines how popular the term is based on the number of hits returned in a Flickr search (Google Fight knockoff??). Along with the search result is a grid of photos for each of the terms. Compare Coke vs. Pepsi, Angelina & Jennifer or whatever else you like… or better yet, don’t.
The one major thing missing from Flickr Fight is it’s lack of attribution for any of the photos it displays. It simply links to the images stored on the Flickr server and doesn’t bother to provide a link to the photo’s page in flickr, or credit the photographer/owner of the image in any way, shape or form.
This is the kind of IP violations that make posting legitimate content online a risky venture. If people don’t consider copyright violations of online material legitimate, then how will these forms of content distribution ever be considered good, legitimate viable sources??
Shame on Flickr Fight, and shame on AppScout for not picking up on this glaring omission.
4 responses so far ↓
1 Flickr Fight Follow-up: The proof | K's Weblog // Jan 26, 2008 at 12:53 pm
[...] the post I did a couple of days back about FlickrFight using images and not attributing them to the photographers who took and own the images, I thought [...]
2 simge // Feb 18, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Hi,
we considered this blog post as a claim and updated our site.
Now we are giving a reference and link to photographer under full sized photos.
Thank you
Flickr Fight Team
3 Keith Murray // Feb 18, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Thank you! That’s great news!
4 Flickr Fight Fixes Attribution! | K's Weblog // Feb 19, 2008 at 12:50 am
[...] when I checked my email I was given a rather pleasant surprise. A comment on one of my blog posts from the folks at Flickr Fight. Hi, we considered this blog post as a claim and updated our [...]
Leave a Comment