avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since: 04/02/2011

Lead

Jul 6 17 11:53 PM

Tags : :

Obviously, they can do whatever they like with their service.

The unfortunate part, though, is that internet users have for the past 14 years overwhelmingly used Photobucket to host images on fora like this one, blogs, etc. for educational and informative purposes.

All of those posts are now, essentially, "broken," with been-there-for-up-to-fourteen-years photos gone, unless that particular user was one of the few who decided to pay Photobucket's $400 annual ransom.

This is a good example of how the internet is terrible as an archival medium when compared to, say, a library. In one fell swoop of Photobucket's higher-ups, think of how much information has now been effectively removed from the "library" of the internet.

I'm not sure I see how this ends well for anyone, honestly. I don't think Photobucket is going to convince many people to subscribe this way-- they'll just switch over to flickr or imgur instead (or host the photos themselves-- a Squarespace site is a quarter the annual fee and you get your own URL, besides)!

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

John Eppstein

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,321 Member Since:31/05/2015

#1 [url]

Jul 7 17 1:52 PM

soapfoot wrote:
Obviously, they can do whatever they like with their service.

The unfortunate part, though, is that internet users have for the past 14 years overwhelmingly used Photobucket to host images on fora like this one, blogs, etc. for educational and informative purposes.

All of those posts are now, essentially, "broken," with been-there-for-up-to-fourteen-years photos gone, unless that particular user was one of the few who decided to pay Photobucket's $400 annual ransom.

This is a good example of how the internet is terrible as an archival medium when compared to, say, a library. In one fell swoop of Photobucket's higher-ups, think of how much information has now been effectively removed from the "library" of the internet.

I'm not sure I see how this ends well for anyone, honestly. I don't think Photobucket is going to convince many people to subscribe this way-- they'll just switch over to flickr or imgur instead (or host the photos themselves-- a Squarespace site is a quarter the annual fee and you get your own URL, besides)!

$400 A YEAR? Are they INSANE????

Who's going to pay that?

Screw Photobucket!  I've never liked them anyway.....

Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since:04/02/2011

#2 [url]

Jul 7 17 4:25 PM

It's kind of old-timey, really.

Holding users' content for ransom is so 20th century. They should just quietly monetize it based on consent they obtained by burying a clause deep in the ToS, like Instagram and everyone else.

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

waltzmastering

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,695 Member Since:02/02/2011

#6 [url]

Jul 14 17 7:33 AM

I came across a studio build thread a couple days ago (purple place) where all the pics were black boxes reading .. "this image is no longer available".
It was a bit depressing, because it wasn't that old of a thread, and you could see there was a lot of time spent documenting the technicalities of the ground-up build.

Last Edited By: waltzmastering Jul 14 17 9:18 AM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,209 Member Since:23/01/2011

#7 [url]

Jul 14 17 8:49 AM

waltzmastering wrote:
I came across a studio build thread a couple days ago (purple place) where all the pics were black boxes reading .. "this image is longer available".
It was a bit depressing, because it wasn't that old of a thread, and you could see there was a lot of time spent documenting the technicalities of the ground-up build.

 
It may--or may not--be 'the right thing to do, but I have been seeing this type of thing happening in a trickle for many years.  For several years now, if there's a topic that I consider really important/indispensable, I do what I have to do to 'print' it as a PDF.  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since:04/02/2011

#8 [url]

Jul 14 17 11:50 AM

The thing is, Photobucket absolutely has a right to determine what services they will and will not provide for free.

But from an "internet citizenship" standpoint, they went about this in a really sloppy way that's likely to cost them whatever last tiny bit of brand equity (and consumer goodwill) they may have had.

There are other ways to drive premium membership that do not involve breaking large portions of the internet and holding them for ransom.

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

ktownson

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,230 Member Since:22/01/2011

#9 [url]

Jul 14 17 1:15 PM

Too Free for Too Long. Everyone is looking for a way to monetize the web. The internet is maturing away from its hippie-dippy ethos.

I've kinda gotten used to sitting through an ad before I watch a YouTube video. Facebook's not really free--you have to give up your privacy to use it. Google is the same--search for something and banner ads chase you around the web for weeks.

We've been spoiled by the "free" nature of the web, but none of this was ever free, just someone else was footing the bill. It makes sense--we should pay for what we use. And if the internet's collective sense of entitlement gives way to a healthier, sustainable model, maybe creative content producers will find a way to make a living.

That said, jumping from free to $400 doesn't seem like a winning strategy.

"Kerry fixed the stereo, and now it doesn't work." (My six-year-old sister)

Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since:04/02/2011

#10 [url]

Jul 14 17 2:34 PM

I don't think this represents a maturation so much as a reactive, rearward-looking strategy borne of a profound misunderstanding of how the internet is situated within (and is indeed perhaps poised to transform) the paradigm of market capitalism.

But that's just one person's opinion.

I don't think the internet was ever "hippie-dippy." Subversive? Perhaps you could make a case.

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since:04/02/2011

#13 [url]

Jul 16 17 5:14 AM

the most interesting part of that, to me:

John Corpus, CEO of Photobucket, said that historically the company “relied heavily on advertising revenue but that major industry-wide changes in the advertising space have greatly impacted Photobucket, including the rise of ad blockers and the Company’s explosion of 3rd party hosting that generates zero revenue.”


So... you can't make money by placing ads anymore? That would probably make Photobucket the ONLY one-- most of the entire internet is ad-supported (or perhaps ad-supported and data mining supported, which is typically just used to place ads).

It's hard not to read that like... "my grocery store isn't doing well... must mean that people have stopped eating."

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,209 Member Since:23/01/2011

#14 [url]

Jul 16 17 9:04 AM

I was just reading the "Improving Mono Folddown" thread.  One word used several times is "decorrelate".  After reading that thread, it strikes me that there is a tremendous effort in society to generally decorrelate work done by one person from payment for that work by someone who gets a benefit from it.  

Correlation ...in common usage it most often refers to the extent to which two variables have a linear relationship with each other

Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,512 Member Since:04/02/2011

#15 [url]

Jul 16 17 9:47 AM

That's certainly been true within industries relying on intellectual property.

of course many would probably make the case that in the era of the major label's dominance, there was already a serious amount of such "decorrelation."

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,209 Member Since:23/01/2011

#16 [url]

Jul 16 17 11:07 AM

soapfoot wrote:
That's certainly been true within industries relying on intellectual property...

I should have qualified it further.  Decorrelation is not happening between me and the guy who put on my roof, for example.  Maybe it's only happening with jobs that many people in the midwest (I'm originally from the midwest) wouldn't refer to as "a real job".  

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help