Mark Zanzig’s Photo Blog

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Who said that Oktoberfest in Munich is cheap entertainment? It isn’t.

Today the tent owners announced their official beer prices for Oktoberfest 2008. Prices for “a Mass” (one liter of beer) will range this year from 7.80 to 8.30 Euro! In 2007, this range was still between 7.30 and 7.90 Euro, so the fans of the fest will face a price increase of roughly 5%! Add to this the increased tip (which is not included in the beer price), and you end up with more than 5% increase.

The cheapest beer will be available at the Wienerwald Festzelt, where a mass of Hofbräu beer will indeed cost just 7.80 Euros. All the big tents are above the 8 Euro mark, many of them even charging the maximum of 8.30 Euro.

Well, I won’t complain. To me, it’s all a matter of supply and demand, and there seems to be tremendous demand for having a beer in the big tents, which justifies the high price. Also, one should remember that beer is in general quite expensive in Munich. The tourism office has done some research: outside the Oktoberfest grounds you pay between 6.20 and 7.80 Euros for a liter of beer - not cheap either.

Cheers!

For further information on the fest, please read our Oktoberfest FAQ.

It’s funny to see copyright threads popping up in the Flickr help forum almost weekly by now. (The current example: Indianchiefguides.com vs. The Flickr Community, here). And like pre-programmed, all these threads develop more or less identical:

1. Flickr member sees an external website that hotlinks or accesses photos from Flickr and notifies the community about it, complete with full domain name and deep links for examples. Usually the photos are copyright protected and marked “All Rights Reserved”.
2. Some discussion among the members (the usual suspects are ColleenM, Walwyn, Lú, zyrcster, austenhaines, iansand, The Evan and The Searcher) about how the site in question is infringing copyright and/or the Flickr community guidelines.
3. As the Flickr Help Forum is a high-traffic forum, traffic soars on the infringing site, and a ton of complaints flows in. Enough for the infringer to show up in the forum, ready to defend their work. (Sometimes the offenders do not show up, which takes all the fun out of the discussion, and it dies soon.)
4. The infringer: “We’re not stealing. We want to give exposure to photographers.” - The mob replies: “Nope. If you are hotlinking a copyright protected photograph without proper authorization, you are stealing.”
5. Infringer: “But it’s on Flickr. People put it there to be seen.” - The mob: “Yes. People put it there to be seen by other members of the community. Flickr is not a free-for-all ride, allowing anyone to use any photo in any way they see fit.”
6. “But we link back to the image on Flickr.” - “This is not sufficient if you are using an image labeled ‘All rights reserved’. You may not use such images at all.”
7. “But we are not using your photo. We’re just showing it to the world, uncompromised, and people would see the same image as they would see it on Flickr.” - “Er, no. You are using the hotlinked image (trying) to make money. So, you are using the image.”
8. “But, heck, we don’t make any money.” - “To us, it does not matter whether a site actually makes money or not. If it’s a business (even a loss-making one), then it’s commercial use.”
9. Flickr staff monitor these threads, but usually keep out of the discussion as they soon could be targeted as well. Also, the mob is doing a good job. At some point someone with the right powers decides to pull the plug on the offender’s account, or on the API key that is being used to access Flickr content. Flickr images stop showing on the infringing site.
10. The offender re-appears under a new name, basically begging for re-instatement, because his site is now broken. These pleas echo in the Flickr help forum, unheard.
11. The mob cools down, waiting for the next infringer to show up (which is just a matter of time).

I have watched this bizarre scenario happen several times:

• Indianchiefguides vs. Flickr community
• Picturesandbox.com vs. Flickr community
• Flishr.com vs. Flickr community
• Molotron vs. Flickr community 
• Insuggest vs. Flickr community
• Hotelchatter vs. Flickr community
• Photobongo vs. Flickr community

And that are just the most prominent cases. The list is endless, really.

My take on this? Of course, the community is usually right: the identified sites often are infringing the photographers copyrights, and they do so for the profits, not caring one bit about the copyright at all. (And the situation will rather get worse in the future, see my analysis.)

But I think that Flickr is at least partly responsible for the situation:

• They do not offer means to protect images with watermarks.
• They use confusing language that can easily be misunderstood (the “Blog This” button, for example, or the statement “This photo is public” next to an image).
• They actively offer an API to access Flickr that makes infringements pretty easy, even if the API terms explicitly prohits such uses.
• Images are by default part of searches conducted by 3rd parties using the Flickr API, i.e. users have to actively opt-out from 3rd party searches to stop this.
• They rename images and remove EXIF data from smaller versions of the images posted to Flickr.

Of course, Flickr is in for the money, too. They know that infringements may happen when running a user generated content site, but they clearly decided to not take a more aggressive stance to protect the copyright of the individual photographers, for example by fixing the issues mentioned above. And I guess they won’t do anything about this in the future - they just let the mob deal with that, while they count the money.

One more reason to stay away from Flickr.

Some of you know that we moved to a new house in the southern suburbs of Munich. In front of our house is (still) a large field of canola that has greeted us every morning for the last couple of weeks. The change became apparent a few days ago, and when I noticed the blossoming of the canola, I knew I just had to take a couple of pictures. Today was the day.

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

The late afternoon light was right, the sky was blue with just a few white clouds. And so I walked the few steps from the house to the field and thought, “and now for something completely different”.

I think I found at least a few unusual angles, especially after putting myself into the position of the insects. The simple canola plants looked suddenly amazingly tall, more like trees…

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

…and sometimes they even resembled giant trees!

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Usually, I am not a big fan of flower shots. I find them boring. But this was different, and I actually like the results. But most important: it was great to stand and move in the yellow sea of canola and inhale that sweet, heavy scent, sent out to attract the bees. I also noticed some fine yellow dust on my trousers. And going down on my knees provided me with new views and made me feel alive (well, more alive than photographing talking heads at a press conference).

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

Mark Zanzig/zettpress

So, I can only encourage anyone, pro or not, to take the time and go out into the field. Da some basic shots. Drop on your knees, feel the soil, and try to see things differently. Even a simple location like a blooming canola field in front of your house might bring some unexpected results.