> Kirsten likens Pinterest to Napster as an enabler of illegal activity. It wasn't just Napster that went down -- 12 year old girls who downloaded music were sued too.
>
> She concludes:
>
> "My initial response is probably the same as most of yours: 'Why [can't I pin their work]? I’m giving them credit and it’s only creating more exposure for them and I LOVE when people pin my stuff!' But then I realized, I was unilaterally making the decision FOR that other photographer...Bottom line is that it is not my decision to make. Not legally and not ethically."
Is it me or these two paragraphs look way too much hyperbolic? I have the feeling that the article subtext is something like "In the next months you may hear about this thing called Pinterest. Just ignore it, it is illegal, you will get in trouble. Stick to the sites you know. How much illegal? Remember Napster? Everybody remember Napster."
Is it me or these two paragraphs look way too much hyperbolic? I have the feeling that the article subtext is something like "In the next months you may hear about this thing called Pinterest. Just ignore it, it is illegal, you will get in trouble. Stick to the sites you know. How much illegal? Remember Napster? Everybody remember Napster."