anysia | Not all photo hosting services are equal.

flickr = censorship
A very talented photographer found out her work had been taken, without her consent, and resold for thousands and thousands of dollars by Only Dreemin . The artist blogged about it on Flickr, and got many comments filled with advice on how to proceed to get the royalties she so rightly deserved. What did Flickr do? They blocked the picture, deleted the blog entry, and for all intents and purposes protected the thieves. This is censorship. Flickrs behavior made me angry. To the point I sent them an email the errors of their ways

I had seriously considered signing up for a Flickr account, and maybe even a pro account, until I read 'the shaft' you gave one of your subscribers.

Some of her work was stolen, and resold for thousands of dollars, and she didn't get one cent in royalties. When she blogged about it on her Flickr account, did you offer assistance? No, you censored her.

There was many postings with advice on how she could legally proceed to get her copyrighted property theft compensated for, but you censored it. I will be telling other photographers to steer clear of your services until you:

A: watermark posted photographs so their theft doesn't lead to the thief making money.

B: stop protecting the thieves and support your subscribers instead.

I know I am only one person, but word of mouth, and the internet makes me a powerful voice. And I will be heard. If I keep just one person from having their work stolen from your service, that's good.