Pinterest Updates Terms of Service

Pinterest proposed changes to Terms of Service, Acceptable Use Policy, and Privacy Policy will go into effect on April, 6th 2012.

In email sent to Pinterest users, several proposed changes were noted that address the copywrite and trademark concerns voiced online:

• Our original Terms stated that by posting content to Pinterest you grant Pinterest the right for to sell your content. Selling content was never our intention and we removed this from our updated Terms.
• We updated our Acceptable Use Policy and we will not allow pins that explicitly encourage self-harm or self-abuse.
• We released simpler tools for anyone to report alleged copyright or trademark infringements.
• Finally, we added language that will pave the way for new features such as a Pinterest API and Private Pinboards.

Many online comments have pointed at Pinterest TOS taking ALL rights of original content uploaded to the site, including the right to sell you work. Honestly, it is good to read in the email the Pinterest team clearly defining their intent of NOT selling your original content.

Will this update solve all copywrite and trademark issues? Probably not. Pinterest did not kick off copywrite sensors, it is just a new iteration of a decades old debate.

In recent days,  Leela Cyd, a photographer by trade, sent a scathing letter  when she discovered her photo included in an article on Pinterest published in the New York Post.  The photo was incorrectly credited as “Courtesy Tory Burch via Pinterest.”  In her letter, Leela vents her frustration at having her original content re-pinned with out proper credit. She makes her living from photography and is not inclined to give freebies.

Trey Ratcliff writes extensively on the dilemma facing photographers who publish their work online and his solution to online sharing of his original content.

The links above give a good briefing on both sides of this issue.  I can empathize with Leela’s frustration over her work being unaccredited. I’ve encountered an instance of a photo of mine on a blog post that gave no photo credit. The author clearly was not making money off of the post, so I let it go. In most cases, however, authors do properly credit my photos – and they have appeared in articles, blog posts and even an online veterinary resource.

At the same time, Trey points out that open sharing can lead to real revenue and not everyone is out to steal your content. Trey relates that 15% of his blog traffic comes from Pinterest. Considering his blog has substantial traffic, this indicates that social sharing sites are rich resources to grow interest in your work.

What is the best way to protect your original work? That depends upon your personal comfort level in sharing your work online. There are several tools including digital watermarking, and registering your photos with a U.S. Copywrite. There will be unauthorized sharing of your online work, that is the nature of online social sharing sites, you have to decide upon an action threshold. What unauthorized use of your images will you accept and what use will cause you to pursue other options?

For Pinterest, if you chose to join, make sure to properly credit y0ur re-pins and if you post your original creations please note your sharing permissions in the about section of your board. Users will certainly appreciate your willingness to share your work and clarity on how you would like your content shared and attributed. For example, I’ve  given permission for Pinterest users to re-pin my photos.  I’ve also updated my Disclosure Policy to reflect Pinterest sharing permissions of my blog posts.

Full disclosure, I license my photos on Flickr to Getty Images and will soon migrate photos to Pitcha Global.

What are your thoughts on copywrite and photo sharing in the social media setting?