Sell Flickr Photos on Getty? Say What?

For whatever reason, when I read that a select few Flickr users will be able to license their photos through Getty, the Black Eyed Peas song "Where is the Love?" came to mind — not because I believe aspiring professional photographers who participate in the Flickr community have a particular affinity for the BEPs, but because the whole proposal has a sort of Willy Wonka's golden ticket air to it that rubs me the wrong way. Though a few golden tickets are nice for some, there are a lot more that are left out than can participate. Exclusion is no fun.

One of the most beautiful things about Flickr and other social networks in general is that communities are designed around the concept of sharing…you know, that thing your Mom lectured incessantly about when you were but a wee child? Imagine how your young compatriots on the playground would have reacted if you'd said they can play with your toy if they purchase a license. The whole fun of sharing goes straight out the window, doesn't it?

With that said, I don't intend to say that it is wrong for aspiring photographers to see profit for their work. I'm a singer-songwriter, and I jump at opportunities to play paid shows, even when I normally just play with friends for the sheer enjoyment of it. That doesn't make me a sell-out, and the people whose photos are selected to be featured on Getty should appreciate and benefit from the exposure.

However, there's a distinct divide betwen communities focused on sharing and those centered on professional exposure. Some time ago, MySpace made it possible for all the aspiring artists who have music pages to sell their tunes to interested users. I didn't particularly care for that, either, because I feel that, in principle, art should be shared first, profited from second. Just yesterday, I joined the social music platform Trig because it offered a better location for sharing more music than MySpace — why would I stick with MySpace for music, where trying to make a few cents for the 6 songs you can upload seems to be the focus, when I can store 250 Mbs of music on Trig and participate in a sharing-based community? MySpace shifted to a profit-based music model, and I don't think it was for the better.

Obviously, the entire point of what I'm saying is that taking shared content the monetized route can, potentially, lead to less-friendly communities. More power to the photographers who are fortunate enough to be chosen for features on Getty and all that, as long as the concept of sharing doesn't get kicked to the curb in favor of profit.