Gizmos Freeware Reviews  

Go Back   Gizmo's Freeware Forum > Debating Chamber > Internet, Web Apps and Networking

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05. Jul 2017, 07:45 PM   #1 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 195
Angry Photobucket's new terms and policies are more like a ransom demand

Photo-hosting site Photobucket has introduced a substantial annual fee ($399 per year, no typo here) for allowing hosted images to be embedded in sites like Ebay, Etsy and Amazon. The action has inspired social backlash from users who see it as a form of ransom as many users realised the change only when their embedded images were replaced by graphics saying their Photobucket accounts needed to be updated.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40492668
IO.Hazard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06. Jul 2017, 01:59 AM   #2 (permalink)
J_L
Co-Author, Best Free Security List
 
J_L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,003
Default

Great way to help your competition.
__________________
http://www.t7j7l.blogspot.com/
J_L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06. Jul 2017, 05:44 AM   #3 (permalink)
Maestro di Search
 
Jojo Yee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,797
Default

Quote:
Australian Glen Stephens, owner of Stampboards.com, the world’s largest stamp collecting bulletin board with more than five million posts going back over a decade, said he and members on five continents had spent “hundreds of hours” this week “rescuing what we can”, rehosting images on stable platforms like Imgur.com before Photobucket goes “belly up”.

“It is clearly a ‘WannaCry’ style gangster level ransom demand for millions [in] cash before they fold forever,” he told news.com.au in an email.
Source: Amazon, eBay images held to ‘ransom’ by Photobucket
Jojo Yee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06. Jul 2017, 08:56 PM   #4 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
eyeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Planet X
Posts: 877
Default

well, truthfully, if the images are being used on amazon/ebay/etc to generate income

then they should write off photobucket as a business expense or find a cheaper solution to host their images, and not free ride someone else
eyeb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07. Jul 2017, 03:13 AM   #5 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 195
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeb View Post
well, truthfully, if the images are being used on amazon/ebay/etc to generate income then they should write off photobucket as a business expense or find a cheaper solution to host their images, and not free ride someone else
You're somewhat correct there, eyeb, but 399 dollars a year is very expensive. Secondly, Photobucket users were given no warning of the change. It came out of nowhere.

The subscription features simply changed, and images stopped loading without explanation and existing Photobucket accounts on free and even paid subscriptions with any embedded images in the past ceased to work. Considering Photobucket has been around since 2003 and hosts over 10 billion images, that's potentially millions of embedded images across the Internet being broken thanks to a policy change.

The service could have warned users about their imminent changes days or weeks before, so people could change hosts and back-up their data instead of being extorted $399.
IO.Hazard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07. Jul 2017, 10:47 PM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
eyeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Planet X
Posts: 877
Default

back up data? were they locked out of the account? Is there any reason they can't login and download them now? I don't use photobucket so I'm not sure how it played out, thought it was simply blocking images from being seen on those sites, not that they were deleted/no access

notice, they could have given one, but companies fail to do this often when making policy changes. Don't like it, but I won't say it is only photobucket. Remember Facebook changing their privacy settings and not telling anyone? What about Google searches?

price point, I'm not one to comment on it. I dislike spending money so $1 is too much for me when there are free options. But I make enough that $400/annually isn't a hardship either.

They could do a tiered system, $400 for unlimited, $100 for 1000 photos/month, $50/500, and so on but... I'm not in charge there
eyeb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 20. Jul 2017, 07:54 PM   #7 (permalink)
Member
 
Skittler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Murphy, North Carolina
Posts: 2
Default

People still use Photobucket? I stopped using that lag fest years ago when better alternatives came along.
Skittler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20. Jul 2017, 09:07 PM   #8 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 195
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeb View Post
back up data? were they locked out of the account? Is there any reason they can't login and download them now? I don't use photobucket so I'm not sure how it played out, thought it was simply blocking images from being seen on those sites, not that they were deleted/no access
Photobucket is offering different plans, but 3rd party linking is available ONLY for the most expensive plan. The rest is without luck. Maybe Photobucket has put itself against the corner and many changes will follow soon.

As for the users, all have access to their respective accounts, the problem is a lot of free users were having problems when trying to download their own pictures from the site. That's why the term 'ransom' started to grow.

As this article says at the end: "It's like Angelfire all over again".
IO.Hazard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.