I’m not going to go deep into this because you can do a Google search for all types of information supporting my argument. My personal opinion for your above statement is this: He’s making money off of someone else’s work. Rule breaking? This should be obvious. Again, do the research. Making money off of someone else’s work is against the law if the publisher doesn’t consent to it. If you believe in intellectual property laws as you kind of stated in your last sentence then you’re kind of stepping on your own words in your first paragraph.

Let’s put this into quick lamen terms:

1) Publishing someone else’s feed publicly on your personal site. — The wrong: stealing bandwidth from the feed owner, stealing his content and not removing it after requested. Again, the whole intellectual property rights cloud covering stealing and plagiarism.

2) Placing ads by the content that was created by someone else on your personal site with the intent of cashing in. — The wrong: For one it’s against Google Adsense TOS. If someone was to report him and when the Adsense team got around to it then they would request him to remove their ads from the illegal pages. It doesn’t matter how much money he’s making… .02 to 1000.00. It’s the same either way. Two, cashing in on someone else’s work. Do I really need to go into this?

I’m not trying to bash on you here but this has been discussed on numerous blogs, forums, news sites, news groups, podcasts and has been beaten to the ground over and over. When it comes down to it… it is wrong.

what info said about his own intellectual property in the feed is an argument i can totally accept.

The fact that these photos come from flickr is one thing. The fact that I classify them, title them, maybe add comments, and by that generate a list of photos (the photos are not mine, but the list is mine, as I’m the one figuring out how to list them) means I got the intelectual property on that list.

Of course, it doesn’t mean that someone else can’t come up with the same list in the same order with the same categories. But one thing is doing that, another thing is simply get the feed as is, and republish it as is.

The thing is, all the posts are marked in the rss, i guess you’ve noticed that all of them say: source: flickrbabes.com. If this content is posted somewhere else, say a porn site, and I the author of the photo sees it, he’s going to blame flickrbabes as well, as it clearly says the content originated there. So, I also need to protect the site and its contents.

I publish the rss feeds, offering a service to all of you, so you can access the content of this site in an easier way (making your rss reader, using a common one like google reader), but that doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want with it: like, republish it in your own site, fill it with ads and profit from it.

Sites like flickrlicio.us (doesn’t exist anymore) and flickrbabes.com where blocked by flickr because we were displaying ads (among other things, we were using too much of flickr bandwith as well). Flickrbabes continued, but making the compromise of never make this site for profit, and you see it isn’t, and I did understand why. First, the photos I post here are not mine, second, the bandwith of the photos is provided by Flickr. Profiting from that would be an abuse from my part. I think the owner of the photos may profit from that if he choses to, as it’s their photos, but all I’m doing is putting the list of photos together.

Just because it’s freely available to display, doesn’t mean it’s freely available for reproduction. I could take all photos i find and publish them here, without credit to the author, and that violates copyright.

I have problems from time to time from photographers that are not willing that their photos are displayed here. I’m very careful about that, and I remove that content. Though I should ask for permission first, the fact is, that most of the photographers are happy when I post their work here, or just don’t mind….and because I post so many photos, I prefer to deal with it when a photographer doesn’t like it. All in all, I do try to respect their rights. It’s their work, and you know this site wouldn’t exist if photographers wouldn’t want to share their content. But first and above all, you have to respect their work, and that’s what I also try to do by restricting my feed to be published in other sites.

“besides daniel being an asshole he still didnt do anything wrong really.”

Directly republishing someone else’s work using that site’s own RSS feed IS wrong for one. Two, he tried to make money off of it by placing ads on the same page. Three, he didn’t remove it upon request. So a combination of the first 2 which lead to the last is where most people draw the line. Some draw the line earlier but most believe that if the outcome is beneficial and doesn’t cause any monetary or reputational damage to the owner then rules can be overlooked.

thx for your positiv comment about my http://www.pd5.de
Would like to make a Link-Exchange with you.
Please write back per eMail.

Tommy

your goal in life is to find us the hot photos of babes and put it on rss!!!!

dang it I don’t have time to mess around clicking sites rss rocks you realize if you don’t have it you loose your rss readers…

omg what moron doesn’t use rss anyway?

Who cares… no one will ever go back. So you really gain nothing.

And I doubt flickrbabes.com cares if you got your 2 friends to subscribe to his feed. Laugh all you want to but you’re laughing by yourself.

Also, thank you so much for the best stats my blog has ever seen, ever.

I actually helped you gain readers/subscribers because my friends would check out my site and add your feed to their feed readers. This is not accomplishing anything, but making my day go by quickly with so much hilarity.

Thank you so much, this is awesome.

-Daniel

But this Daniel guy is a shithead. Flickrbabes is providing a value-added service of selection and aggregation. This isn’t a raw Flickr feed. It’s a premium selection of the raw stream of Flickr content.

Maybe someday Daniel will learn what it is to add value rather than just steal because it’s possible.

Meanwhile, I’ll just add Flickrbabes to my daily surfing list.

Have a good day!

I am a senior developer, I handled REAL spam, especially porn spam and mass posters. I love your feed that much that I am willing to contribute a couple of hours of work to make your feed work again.

please contact me.

Tim

Yes, one single photo from a single photographer can and must be removed if the owner requests. It’s their work. I even remove them if the photo is under CC license, eventhough I’d have the right to post it, but I think the first thing you have to have is respect.

And no, you’re not the cause of the rss feed being restricted. I actually are more worried about another site featuring porn ads, I think I’ve mentioned that in my post? no?

You’re just a retard, and I’m not even mad about your attitude, because in the end, when you grow up, you’re going to realize that you pay for every one of your acts.

Still hilarious that the guy is shutting down the site for everyone. There has to be more than just me going into his decision. Just like there was more going on with the photographer asking for a single picture to be removed. That was missing from the original e-mail he sent me.

GG

-Lame Asshole

Just accept that you are lame and leave!