NYT blogger (she can't be a paid reporter) Sonia Zjawinski posts a follow up piece to her advocating stealing photographs to decorate her apartment. Here.
My first thought was "Did your editors tell you to write that, Sonia?" It was a totally different slant than the first piece. And it doesn't change my perspective on her actions or the attitude of the NYT editors for allowing the first piece to be posted in the first place.
I wonder if someone scanned in and turned entire pages of the NewYorkTimes into wallpaper and did up their apartment or office with it if that would be ok? I am sure the NYT wouldnt mind that. Seems like fair use to me. If the NYT lawyers do mind, they should just be referred to their employee as the inspiration.
Additionally, Sonia has two Flickr accounts here and here. (Thanks Tawnee for finding them). You will note that all her images are All Rights Reserved. Ironic eh? I guess she knew enough about copyright to set them that way despite her going on about Creative Commons in her post. And her accounts are one of those 'set up a couple of years ago, then never used after, grey blocky head accounts' I hate so much. And guess what? Block. She essentially reaffirmed with concrete examples in her first blog post what those image packrats, thieves and non photographers do on Flickr. Flickr is the worlds best image sharing site - as Flickr bills itself and she quotes, but it's not free-for-all shopping mall for cheapo decorators like Ms Zjawinski .
I agree with the commenters on that second blog and others I have talked with about this. An apology is in order from the Times.
Mike Wood Photography