The hottest new social site, Pinterest, has responded to concerns of copyright conscious website owners by offering a way for sites to block pinning directly from their websites (by placing a <meta name="pinterest" content="nopin" /> in their site's header).
Sites that don't want users stealing pinning their images can now place code on their site and Pinterest's users will no longer be able to pin images from that site in one click.
The move comes on the heels of several articles outlining the fact that almost all Pinterest users are violating copyright laws and that Pinterest's terms of service actually make the user liable for that copyright infringement.
Unfortunately, Pinterest is merely putting the proverbial lipstick on their copyright abusing pig.
Pinterest users can STILL save any image from any website, and upload it to Pinterest (removing any value to the originating site) where it can then be repinned into oblivion.
Pinterest also still puts ALL of the responsibility and, more importantly, liability for that copyright violation on their users. If a copyright holder decides to get litigious with Pinterest, Pinterest would likely turn around and sue the user for any damages or costs associated with that lawsuit.
And assuming you actually ARE the copyright holder of that image you just pinned, you just granted Pinterest a "worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, royalty-free license, with the right to sublicense, to use, copy, adapt, modify, distribute, license, sell, transfer, publicly display, publicly perform, transmit, stream, broadcast, access, view, and otherwise exploit such Member Content only on, through or by means of the Site, Application or Services!"
Don't Ruin Pinterest!
My wife has been a Pinterest addict pretty much from the first moment she was introduced to the site. She's gotten ideas for everything from meals to hair styles to dog toys and treats from her fellow pinners. And every time she sensed any interest from me in the site for marketing purposes she'd instantly threaten me. "Don't ruin Pinterest!" The "or else" was pretty much implied.
Pinterest Ruined Pinterest
But my wife is also an avid photographer. When I explained that by pinning any photo she didn't own she was very likely breaking the law and by pinning photos she DOES own, she was granting Pinterest that "perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, royalty-free license" I was more than a little afraid she was going to stab me.
"Sorry," I said, "I really didn't mean to ruin Pinterest."
"YOU didn't ruin Pinterest, Pinterest ruined Pinterest, and I hope people make a BIG stink about it."
And in one single sentence my wife summed up Pinterest's MAJOR problem with copyright.
By putting both copyright owners and their users at risk, Pinterest will have no one left in their corner defending them like they had when it was discovered Pinterest was secretly swapping out users' affiliate links for their own.
Other image sites such as Google Images or Yahoo owned Flickr display copyrighted images just like Pinterest does. Other image sites make copyright owners opt-out of having their images stolen. Almost all image sites make content creators enforce the copyright laws because the image site owners don't care who's copyright is being violated as long as THEY aren't the ones being held liable for it.
But unlike almost every other image site out there, Pinterest forces their users to grant Pinterest unprecedented rights to use their images however Pinterest wants!
As it stands now, Pinterest has allowed hundreds if not thousands of people to violate Matthew (Oatmeal) Inman's copyright by fraudulently grant Pinterest free reign to do whatever they want with his images. If Inman himself were to pin his comics, Pinterest could sell books, t-shirts, posters, greeting cards (all items Inman himself currently sells) and he wouldn't be owed a dime.
The scenarios are endless, but they revolve around Pinterest benefiting from content producers' work while perpetually and irrevocably screwing them in the process.
Tweet
Irrevocable Means It's Too Late
If you, like most people, didn't actually read Pinterest's terms of service and posted images you own onto Pinterest, you're likely too late. While I'm certainly not a lawyer, granting someone irrevocable rights seems to suggest you can't just delete your pins and revoke Pinterest's right to do whatever they please with that image.
So yes, Pinterest will be making copyright violation one or two steps tougher for users by allowing site owners to block one click pins.
Unfortunately they're still passing the burden of copyright violations on to their users while quietly acquiring irrevocable and transferable rights to millions of images that they can sub-license, sell, or distribute however they want.
Tweet
Speak Out!
If my wife's reaction is any indication, Pinterest users are going to be just as upset at Pinterest as copyright holders should be. To help get the message out we recommend pinning and sharing either of the two images below. We promise not to sue you for pinning them, no matter what Pinterest decides to do with them.
Update
It appears Pinterest has heard the public outcry and is at least listening to the copyright concerns created by their Terms of Service. One common thread that seems to be running throughout all the different discussions on this topic is that people WANT to use Pinterest and WANT the site to succeed. We just want to do so without violating copyright laws and without permanently giving Pinterest the right to use our images in almost any way they see fit.
Image source: pasukaru76 & p-j-trash
{ 66 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Alan, that part was actually something I broke in the pin button code apparently. It should be fixed now. Sorry about that!
What frustrates me is that these accusations against Pinterest and the subsequent knee-jerk reactions they’re inspiring are being made by people who don’t truly understand the issue. You say that this post is “educating people about Pinterest’s ToS,” and yet you also admit that you don’t REALLY know what those terms mean, because you’re not a copyright lawyer, and therefore, you’re just guessing. Sooooo, why didn’t you contact a copyright lawyer to clear up the issues you didn’t understand BEFORE you posted this article and created those images that you want everyone to pin?
You, and others, (especially the bozos who created the “Pinterest Project” on http://linkwithlove.typepad.com), are perpetuating the spread of misinformation, which helps no one.
And, what cracks me up is how everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over something that isn’t really happening. You say that “if Inman himself were to pin his comics, Pinterest could sell books, t-shirts, posters, greeting cards (all items Inman himself currently sells) and he wouldn’t be owed a dime.” Well, a) that statement is entirely false, and b) even if it were true, do you REALLY believe that Pinterest would do that? I mean, really, really, truly? My answer is a hearty NO, because I believe Pinterest’s mission statement, I believe that the people running Pinterest are smarter than that, and I also believe that people are innocent until proven guilty.
But I promise that if I ever see Ben Silbermann hawking Oatmeal coffee mugs at the mall, I will eat my words.
I don’t see where Pinterest is doing any of that. I have an account, and when I see good ideas for something, whether it be home renovating or places I would love to travel, I pin it. It is stored on my Pinterest account, NOT my personal computer, and the links link to the place from where I pinned it from. Meal ideas, clothing ideas, paint color ideas, anything you can think of. Pinterest introduces people to people, places and ideas that maybe you haven’t thought of.
Maybe it could be modified with more recognition to the original owner of that chili recipe, but the idea of Pinterest is a good one, and it is easy to see why so many people like it. You aren’t stealing people’s images by pinning them. Its no different than bookmarking the page.
If they take Pinterest away people can still simply save entire pages to their computers, save images to their computers or anything else that does risk violating copyrights. Pinterest just keeps links and ideas pinned to an area in your account so you have access to those great ideas you stumbled upon last Friday.
People, in typical fashion make everything out to be a copyright issue. If you are going to stay awake at night popping ulcer pills worrying about your image being put on Pinterest and repinned a billion times, why did you offer it to the public by putting it online in the first place?
And I am a photographer, and my images are online as well… I know the risks.
Sarah,
I’m not a lawyer so I can’t say for certain what would hold up in court. For example, I’ve been told Pinterest’s ToS wouldnt hold up and that they would still face legal liability should someone decide to sue them for copyright infringement.
However, the ToS absolutely ARE claiming rights to your images AND making users certify that they own or can grant rights to the images they pin. Those are the facts and just because you’re a fan of the site doesn’t change those facts.
As the comment after yours clearly illustrates, there is a LOT of misunderstanding about Pinterest and copyright. The site stores 600px images on their own servers, this most certainly is NOt just like bookmarking a site as some commenters have claimed.
I find it telling that your reply does not address anything I actually said in my comment, but instead refers to statements made by others. And why is it that you have not replied to the comment by Nick Fitzsimons, which clearly explains the language in the terms of service and refutes many of your claims?
I don’t really care, because your statements prove your ignorance, and not mine, but I must refute your assumption that I am a fan of Pinterest. I do not have a Pinterest account, nor am I on Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Tumblr, or any other sharing site. I do all of my communicating and sharing online via email, and I do just fine, thank you.
What I AM a fan of, however, is THE TRUTH, and therefore, by extension, RESEARCH. And the CAPS LOCK. I simply feel that you should be able to back up your assertions with actual FACTS before you tell people to take action and “get the (false) message out.”
Sarah, I’m not sure how you’re still managing to argue against what is in black and white on Pinterest’s own Terms of Service that you can click through and read for yourself.
Fact 1) Pinterest’s ToS states that by pinning an image, you’re asserting that you either own the image or can grant Pinterest rights to use that image. In a very large majority of cases, that’s NOT true. Most “pinners” don’t own the images they are pinning, and as a result, they are violating copyright law. That is, as you put it, THE TRUTH and actual FACT.
Fact 2) Pinterest’s ToS is forcing users to grant them rights to their images. Unlike other image sites such as Flickr or Google Images, the rights Pinterest is claiming are perpetual and irrevocable. This is also the truth and a fact.
Feel free to argue against both of those two facts until you’re blue in the face but they are in print and are irrefutable.
What you seem to have a problem with is my speculation about what could be done with the images that Pinterest is undoubtedly gaining perpetual and irrevocable rights to. I have no idea what Pinterest’s business plans are, or what they could get away with if they were taken to court.
However, just because a company has yet to exercise their rights does not mean we shouldn’t be wary of granting them those rights. THAT is the message I wanted to spread through this post and no matter how much you argue, it doesn’t change the two main facts that I’ve once again highlighted in this comment.
The fun/frustrating/interesting thing about the law, especially copyright and trademark law, is that the only opinion that matters is that of the judge and/or jury deciding a case in the court of law. Maybe the hypothetical situation that I speculated about would never hold up and Pinterest would be ordered to pay a truck load of money. Maybe Pinterest will never attempt to do anything malicious with the millions of images users are uploading to their site.
But I for one, think Pinterest should change their ToS to, at the very least, be more in line with sites like Flickr or Google, and will not be uploading or pinning any content until they do so. What you or anyone else does with the information presented in this post is outside of my control.
FYI, here’s another very good post about Pinterest & their ToS written by someone who is a lawyer –
http://ddkportraits.com/2012/02/why-i-tearfully-deleted-my-pinterest-inspiration-boards/
The article mostly discusses the legal/ethical implications a Pinterest user faces, but it illustrates quite well that their ToS are written horribly and basically render the site useless.
As a business owner/blogger I WANT people to pin from my website and blog. The images link right back to my site which only creates more traffic. I’m not claiming that Pinterest users are or are not infringing copyright laws….but as these users are not claiming that these images were produced or created by them and should (if the user is using Pinterest properly) alway link back to where the original content stemmed or at least from a reputable site that gives the original content credit I don’t see the problem. Who in their right mind would sue Pinterest/Pinterest users for liking their images/work and spreading it to a wider audience? Isn’t that the entire point of posting content online, for it to reach a broad audience? Pinterest only helps make this happen.
Thank you. You confirmed to one of the FEW people who actually read the terms of Pinterest’s service, that was I was reading was in fact accurate.
Any pin that I pin that isn’t mine, is copyright infringement.
You did enlighten me to the fact that I’ve lost my own rights over my own images by pinning them to my boards, though, and I thank you for that information.
I read over and over trying to make sure what I was reading was accurate and what I settled on was that the only images I’m allowed to pin, legally, are my own. But, somewhere in there I doubted what I knew, because I saw everyone else pinning and thought that it must not be true if all these other people are doing it (and not getting in trouble). Yea. I know. Lamest excuse ever.
I’m removing myself from Pinterest. Trust your gut, folks.
Correction, not lost my rights, but handed over some rights.
@Jennifer Harrup, You hit the nail on the head for savvy business owners. Being “pinned” equals more traffic equals more sales equals more revenue. Business owners and bloggers I visit are constantly writing about how they are amazed at the sudden influx of visitors … and customers … who visit from P. The other day, there was a blogger who was talking about how she only had 12 (twelve!) hits on her site, until one of her entry’s pictures was pinned, and suddenly she had over 75k in no time flat.
Those who are worried about their copyright should post it on their pictures via watermark or some other means. AFAIK, no one can transfer the rights of your copyrighted picture FOR you, so someone else pinning your pictures does not invalidate your copyright.
Ben,
Excellent write-up, thanks! The more I read about what Pinterest is doing (and not doing!) the more it bothers me. I’d love to use that awesome ‘STOP sign’ logo on my pages on various sites (my own as well as image hosting sites) to advertise that I do not want my work pinned (or, where a site does not allow embedding images, maybe use it as a temporary avatar!).
Would such a use be allowed? You do encourage sharing and pinning it, but it would be great if you would grant much wider usage for people to use it on their own sites and on sites where their work is hosted – after all not all sites that host work have measures in place to ‘prevent’ pinning (to the extent possible). I should also mention that it would not be possible in all circumstances to link back to to here, depending on what type of image embedding and linking image-hosting sites allow their users. But if it’s widely adopted and linked back where possible, would you accept that?
Also, if you do allow this, would you prefer we use our own (downloaded & re-uploaded) copy, or use a direct hotlink to your version on this site?
(I won’t be able to ‘pin’ it myself because I definitely not sign up with Pinterest: even if I wanted to use the site – which I don’t – I could not possibly sign up given their terms!)
I own the copyright to my images. That is ingrained in copyright law and treaties around the world.
A social media site or social networking can lay claims to member content, because the member is responsible and in the user agreement, states he or she either owns the content or has permission to share, on Pinterest.
Now, if we ask ourselves, do all the members ask before pinning? I think it is fairly safe to write, that no users do not ask.
What is more of a concern, is the usage and modification to our works that Pinterest claims it can do.
Also, member content is considered links, so, again how does a member own a link?
Here’s a web site that has easy to understand copyright info.
http://lib.byu.edu/departs/copyright/tutorial/intro/page1.htm
Marjolein,
Feel free to use the image any place you can link back to this page. If you would like to use the image as your avatar on Twitter or Facebook feel free to do so.
Excellent – thank you, Ben!
What about the “embed” code next to each pinned item?
I can click the embed and place the code on my blog, from Pinterest, where the user may or may not own the rights to the work.
Heck I can even resize, read modify, the pinned work.
← Previous Comments
{ 12 trackbacks }