A tweet from Dave Gorman appeared in my Twitter feed this morning which concerns me somewhat. He has had his own photo on his Flickr stream deleted because some huge company filed a copyright infringement. Flickr deleted the photo without first investigating whether these claims were correct, and Dave has lost all the comments and links to the photo along with it.
I have sent an email to Flickr about this (which includes a link to Dave’s blog with the full story).
Not a problem I’m experiencing, but something about Flickr that concerns me: deleting content when you receive a copyright infringement notification, without investigating first.
See this blog for details: http://gormano.blogspot.com/2012/03/if-this-picture-looks-bit-familiar-it.html
Doesn’t really seem in tune with Flickr’s aims of getting your photos to the people that matter and finding better ways of organising content.
Surely it would make more sense to hide the content until investigated? Especially when you consider that many Flickr users probably also have Blogger, WordPress, Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, etc. accounts and link to photos. This wouldn’t seem the best way to keep your users happy, especially the ones paying for Pro accounts.
And I DO expect an answer why Flickr operates in this way.