Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

Unsplash is Being Acquired by Getty Images (petapixel.com) 11

Unsplash has announced that as of today it is being acquired by Getty Images. From a report: In a blog post, Unsplash's founder Mikael Cho says that it will continue to operate as a standalone brand inside of Getty and that the free content model won't be changing. Unsplash launched in 2013 as a simple Tumblr blog with free photos, and it has since become well-known as a free photography stock site where photographers upload full-resolution images to the platform. Those photos can then be downloaded and used by anyone for any purpose without requiring attribution (though Unsplash does encourage it). The company has been somewhat controversial among photographers over the years, as people see it as a contributor to lowering the pay rate bar for both stock photographers and the value of photography overall. With more than 100 million images downloaded every month, the platform is clearly popular.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Unsplash is Being Acquired by Getty Images

Comments Filter:
  • by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Tuesday March 30, 2021 @11:14AM (#61217486)
    ... Well, you can kiss that good-bye. "a free photography stock site" runs quite counter to what Getty images seems to be about, in spite of all the happy words in the press release. Getty Images and "free" (as in beer) seem to me to be polar opposites.
  • The company has been somewhat controversial among photographers over the years, as people see it as a contributor to lowering the pay rate bar for both stock photographers and the value of photography overall.

    Substitute "programmers" and "programming" for photographers and photography and have fun.

    • The company has been somewhat controversial among photographers over the years, as people see it as a contributor to lowering the pay rate bar for both stock photographers and the value of photography overall.

      Substitute "programmers" and "programming" for photographers and photography and have fun.

      Ever heard of FOSS? Free, open-source software?

      Look, every field out there has room for amateurs and hobbyists. Me, I used to sing. I was never Pavarotti, and I certainly was never paid. However, I was good enough to be part of a few large, public performances. Should Pavarotti be mad at me for lowering musical standards?

      Depending on what you need, free images may be good enough. If you need something special, you may have to pay for it.

    • Your analogy doesn't stand up to even the most cursory of examinations.

      When you hire a photographer to take a picture, do you need to hire more photographers to update that picture to run with more recent operating system releases?
  • A "free content model" part of Getty's brand?

    The Getty Images whose lawsuit prompted Google to remove direct links from its image search? That Getty?

    Pull the other one, it has got bells on.
    • It's not the first time. All the major stock companies have bought out free competition. As a graphic designer, I've seen it a dozen times. The usual MO is to load the search results on the free site with "premium" alternatives from their commercial offerings.

  • by xack ( 5304745 ) on Tuesday March 30, 2021 @11:32AM (#61217560)
    As much as i hate Wikip/media, the Commons is still the one of their biggest resources. Also there are a lot of organizations that want to disappear Archive.org as well.
  • Getty is evil (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday March 30, 2021 @12:00PM (#61217648) Homepage
    Getty is yet another great example of why large companies should not be allowed to buy up their smaller competitors.

    Our personal story - and the reason I consider Getty evil: We had licensed some images from a smaller company. Getty bought them, and a year or two later threatened to sue us using those images without a license. We had proof of payment, but we (perhaps stupidly) didn't have anything that specifically listed which images we had licensed. The old website of the smaller company - with all the transaction information - was conveniently shut down. We talked to our lawyer, but for the amount in question it just wasn't worth the legal battle. I know, you aren't supposed to pay blackmail - it just encourages the criminals.

    We later found out this was part of a larger European campaign [spiegel.de], where they threatened to sue thousands of different people and organizations. It's even mentioned in their Wikipedia page (at least in German) - with the remark that, in retrospect, Getty included numerous customers who had legitimate licenses. In actual fact, I don't believe they ever filed a single court case. They just took the money they could extort and called it a day.

    Is Getty evil? Or just scum?

    Let's just say: if I were using any of the free images from Unsplash, I would find a substitute soon. Real soon.

  • I never knew ye.

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Working...