RE: Steem is not YouTube. Violating the Terms will not get your Content Removed

[uruiamme]

The service will not be without costs. Searching for copyrighted images costs about $0.01 per search in large quantities. The website to host images, the coding to write the software, and the administration of it will incur fees for the development team.

You are encouraged to join as a potential user or as an image provider. If someone is interested as an investor, these matters will need to be discussed.

For the time being, there is only a concept and an urgency to come clean.

As for YouTube itself, I don't know if it is profitable or not. But it is my understanding that Stock Image companies indeed are.

Comments

[nigelmarkdias]

As for YouTube itself, I don't know if it is profitable or not.

YouTube is profitable for both content creators & Google. @uruiamme

• A basic Google image search shows whether an image is free to use or not.
• Purging spam & copyright infringement would work better with a ramped up AI & human @cheetah, @twitterbot & @steemcleaners.
• With Getty & ShutterStock, what is the USP of your image project?
• How will you monetize images submitted to you which have already been shared on Facebook? Without Facebook claiming its pound of flesh?

I will recommend @clitdias, who shoots nature in Dubai to join as an image provider.

#photography #startup

[uruiamme]

A basic Google image search shows whether an image is free to use or not.

I have not found this to be true.

Facebook: not a problem. It is non-exclusive.

you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content
(From Facebook TOS)

Also, you said this:

With Getty & ShutterStock, what is the USP of your image project?

what do you mean by USP?

[nigelmarkdias]

I have not found this to be true.

• A filtered Google Image search will indicate whether an image is licensed or not. Google calls it usage rights.
• USP: unique selling propisition
• On Facebook:

So, although you may be able to withdraw your consent to the use of photos on Facebook, you should also keep in mind that if you share your photos and videos with Facebook applications, those applications may have their own terms and conditions of how they use your creation!
Who Owns Photos and Videos Posted on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter?

[uruiamme]

the unique selling position should be obvious.

For Steemians, we love other Steemians and Steemian products and services.

With my proposed stock image site, I would enable Steem photogs to make Steem currency directly. For the Steemian blogger, there is an innate trust of other Steemians who produce artwork. And as a Steemian project, my site would have significant advantage over any stock photo site. Furthermore, the "cheetah" style bot will be pointing people to my site.

In other words.... it will be sufficiently unique to acquire new users daily.

[uruiamme]

And as for Facebook licensing, I am not interested in your diversion.

Here's why: It's irrelevant

Facebook is not where real professional photographers post their work. That is plain and simple. Facebook is full of junk, and no one is interested in licensing junk for their blog anyway. There may be a news story periodically, but the bloggers needing those images can usually get by with fair use of those kinds of images.

So who cares about the Facebook TOS?

Not the billion users who post photos on it every day. And certainly not me.

[nigelmarkdias]

All the very best with your project, @uruiamme
Your expertise on this issue is vastly superior to mine, sir.

[nigelmarkdias]

I am not interested in your diversion.

Yet, there was a question posed to me on images in one of my posts. 😊