Photobucket - Please Read

[Scott]

Barkley, our themes and attachment system only works for ProBoards software. Any other attempted use would be a violation of our Terms of Service.

[Kami]

I'd like to offer some perspective.

ProBoards is a free (unless you choose otherwise) forum host. In an effort to make our lives easier when it comes to customising our forums, they have very thoughtfully included a custom image section in the themes area.

The fact of the matter is: ProBoards is not an image host.

Now, I understand people would find it incredibly convenient if ProBoards became one, but there's a tonne of logistics involved too: dedicated servers so their forum service isn't affected (which includes not only additional upfront cost of server purchase, but maintenance as well as protection), people to handle the image-hosting portion of their service (more employees = more outgoing expenditure!, and would likely include a dedicated support staff, developers for both front and backend content along with designers for UX/UI), more ads to help offset these costs on both sets of services.

At my dayjob, we're actually in the middle of such a restructure -- not for image hosting, but we're shifting from X type of service to Y type of service, and the workload is IMMENSE and our very small company and even smaller developer department are running around like headless chickens trying to sort everything while keeping with the higher ups' budget for the content we're producing.

ProBoards seems like the 'easy' solution for members because hey, we're here already, and PB is so great about having unintrusive ads!

But consider the cost, and shift in business practices. On top of that, look at the thread where they say they're going to allow adblockers now but will make it a bit more inconvenient for people using them, in order to encourage revenue from ads that keep the free service running -- look at how many people are against this idea.

The reason, as Brian has pointed out, that Photobucket has turned this way (as well as imgur, and any other image host that disallows "hotlinking" / using their content as part of web design hosting) is money. It's a circular situation: it costs more money to host images that are served hundreds if not thousands of times per day per IMAGE > more ads are needed to keep the service free > more people use adblocker denying the service revenue > more obtrusive ads are needed to get around adblocker and generate revenue > prices on paid plans go up > hotlinking is disabled / disallowed.

Even if it weren't against the terms of service, it's against the spirit of the thing. ProBoards has offered theme image hosting as a way to avoid stuff like Photobucket's no-hotilnking rule. To then try and essentially exploit what you feel is a loophole afforded to you if you pay (and note: not everyone pays) is unfair and will lead to more stringent measures to ensure that PB's finances don't go down the tubes and wind up like Photobucket.

[Barkley]

Jul 1, 2017 8:32:11 GMT -8 Kami said:

I'd like to offer some perspective.

ProBoards is a free (unless you choose otherwise) forum host. In an effort to make our lives easier when it comes to customising our forums, they have very thoughtfully included a custom image section in the themes area.

The fact of the matter is: ProBoards is not an image host.

Now, I understand people would find it incredibly convenient if ProBoards became one, but there's a tonne of logistics involved too: dedicated servers so their forum service isn't affected (which includes not only additional upfront cost of server purchase, but maintenance as well as protection), people to handle the image-hosting portion of their service (more employees = more outgoing expenditure!, and would likely include a dedicated support staff, developers for both front and backend content along with designers for UX/UI), more ads to help offset these costs on both sets of services.

At my dayjob, we're actually in the middle of such a restructure -- not for image hosting, but we're shifting from X type of service to Y type of service, and the workload is IMMENSE and our very small company and even smaller developer department are running around like headless chickens trying to sort everything while keeping with the higher ups' budget for the content we're producing.

ProBoards seems like the 'easy' solution for members because hey, we're here already, and PB is so great about having unintrusive ads!

But consider the cost, and shift in business practices. On top of that, look at the thread where they say they're going to allow adblockers now but will make it a bit more inconvenient for people using them, in order to encourage revenue from ads that keep the free service running -- look at how many people are against this idea.

The reason, as Brian has pointed out, that Photobucket has turned this way (as well as imgur, and any other image host that disallows "hotlinking" / using their content as part of web design hosting) is money. It's a circular situation: it costs more money to host images that are served hundreds if not thousands of times per day per IMAGE > more ads are needed to keep the service free > more people use adblocker denying the service revenue > more obtrusive ads are needed to get around adblocker and generate revenue > prices on paid plans go up > hotlinking is disabled / disallowed.

Even if it weren't against the terms of service, it's against the spirit of the thing. ProBoards has offered theme image hosting as a way to avoid stuff like Photobucket's no-hotilnking rule. To then try and essentially exploit what you feel is a loophole afforded to you if you pay (and note: not everyone pays) is unfair and will lead to more stringent measures to ensure that PB's finances don't go down the tubes and wind up like Photobucket.

That sounds like a discussion Kami, not part of the Terms of service.

[Kami]

Jul 1, 2017 8:52:34 GMT -8 Barkley said:

That sounds like a discussion Kami, not part of the Terms of service.

It is a fact that it is against the Terms of Service, as stated by a ProBoards employee (in this case Scott).

Therefore, it is inconsequential and 100% pointless to argue the merits of whether or not it is a terms of service violation (it is). Literally any comment beyond "it is against TOS" is a discussion, so I fail to see your point in stating that my post is a discussion.

And to boot, I am not a ProBoards employee, so I would not be able to change whether or not it is a TOS violation, so by definition anything I bring to the table is a discussion.

I was simply providing perspective (as stated in the very first sentence of my post) on why, from a practical standpoint using ProBoards as a dedicated image source and/or attempting to circumvent the fact that the theme image uploader is meant to be used for your theme images is, logistically and likely financially, a much more complicated effort than "stop making v6 and talk about becoming a duo forum and image host instead".

[Barkley]

Jul 1, 2017 8:20:46 GMT -8 Scott said:

Barkley , our themes and attachment system only works for ProBoards software. Any other attempted use would be a violation of our Terms of Service.

Scott, I don't use the theme image facility for anything other than site purposes, i.e, thumbnails for plugins, smilies, tiny images for the drop down nav, tiny images for a few custom pages etc.

You can see exactly my use here: loveevertonforum.com/admin/themes/87/settings#images-container-tab

I just want to be clear that my use is fair, and not excessive.

My earlier point though, was that if we're going to discuss any change in image storage policy, it would be wise to bring it up with your colleagues sooner, rather than after v6 has been completed. 

[Barkley]

Jul 1, 2017 8:58:02 GMT -8 Kami said:

Jul 1, 2017 8:52:34 GMT -8 Barkley said:

That sounds like a discussion Kami, not part of the Terms of service.

It is a fact that it is against the Terms of Service, as stated by a ProBoards employee (in this case Scott ).

Therefore, it is inconsequential and 100% pointless to argue the merits of whether or not it is a terms of service violation (it is). Literally any comment beyond "it is against TOS" is a discussion, so I fail to see your point in stating that my post is a discussion.

And to boot, I am not a ProBoards employee, so I would not be able to change whether or not it is a TOS violation, so by definition anything I bring to the table is a discussion.

I was simply providing perspective (as stated in the very first sentence of my post) on why, from a practical standpoint using ProBoards as a dedicated image source and/or attempting to circumvent the fact that the theme image uploader is meant to be used for your theme images is, logistically and likely financially, a much more complicated effort than "stop making v6 and talk about becoming a duo forum and image host instead".

With respect, anything to do with TOS has to actually be 'in' the TOS. A staff member can't decide something in conversation, and it become TOS.

Maybe we can let Scott or his team answer, given it's an important subject. 

If I can add, I'm also talking in regard to the fact that all forums get 50mb, and when that's used up, you have to pay for more storage if you want it.

This means that what you wrote, doesn't really apply, as your 2nd line stated "ProBoards is a free (unless you choose otherwise)" and paying for extra storage, is "choosing otherwise" is it not?

Nobody expects FREE storage, but if we pay for extra, the use of the extra should be down to the purchaser, providing it stays within the boundaries of the TOS. If there are no boundaries written in the TOS, then it becomes a grey area that needs proper clarification in the TOS, not in a random discussion. The only boundaries I see are to adhere to objectionable content.

My own interpretation would be something along the lines of "We all get 50mb - that's your lot. Anything above this you have to pay for" That seems a fair interpretation in my book. 

[Søren]

Jul 1, 2017 8:20:46 GMT -8 Scott said:

Barkley , our themes and attachment system only works for ProBoards software. Any other attempted use would be a violation of our Terms of Service.

Does that include plugins for PB?

I never use the image attachment feature much until this Photobucket issue as was never sure what it really for.

I use to host images for the Monetary Shop plugin in Photobucket but upload them to the custom image part on PB and used url for the plugin so could fix all ugly images across my forum

Will change it to new host if needed (:

[Scott]

I trust that all our members follow the ToS and as long as each feature is used as intended, there should be no issue. If anyone is concerned otherwise, it's best to just PM a Support Admin.

The "important subject" of this thread is that Photobucket is enforcing their no hot-linking policy which affects a lot of our members. As other image hosting services become known as a viable alternative, we are updating our External Resources Help Guide article accordingly.

As we are an online forum hosting service and not an image hosting service, any discussion to the former is moot and just confuses the issue. The upcoming release of v6 does not change this fact.

Regarding the plugin question - as I am not a developer and so do not have knowledge of how v6 will deal with plugins, themes, etc., my recommendation is to use each feature as intended.  Plugins that use linked images, I would suggest an external image host at this time as I cannot predict how things will be in the future.

[Kami]

Barkley, paying for increased attachment space on ProBoards doesn't give you carte blanche ability to do what you will. It is still up to the person you are paying for the service to determine what the terms of use are for that service, including and up to any extras that may be included.

For example, just because a client has purchased my services doesn't mean that they can then -- because they've paid me -- use my services for anything other than what they're intended to be used for. I still retain control over what my work can be used for as per the agreement we both signed (which, in this case, is any user's acceptance of the PB TOS and Community Guidelines).

Now far beit for me to dictate the Terms of Service (of course) but I was simply offering perspective on why it's not a simple course of action to decide and even discuss whether or not ProBoards should also become an image host in addition to a forum host.

The fact of the matter is that the intent of ProBoards, when providing storage space, is for it to be used in conjunction with their service. By using it otherwise you compromise the ability of ProBoards to provide their service to others, and would -- by my understanding of the TOS -- fall under section 19 (j), interfering with the Service.

[Barkley]

Jul 1, 2017 9:45:26 GMT -8 Kami said:

Barkley , paying for increased attachment space on ProBoards doesn't give you carte blanche ability to do what you will. It is still up to the person you are paying for the service to determine what the terms of use are for that service, including and up to any extras that may be included.

For example, just because a client has purchased my services doesn't mean that they can then -- because they've paid me -- use my services for anything other than what they're intended to be used for. I still retain control over what my work can be used for as per the agreement we both signed (which, in this case, is any user's acceptance of the PB TOS and Community Guidelines).

Now far beit for me to dictate the Terms of Service (of course) but I was simply offering perspective on why it's not a simple course of action to decide and even discuss whether or not ProBoards should also become an image host in addition to a forum host.

The fact of the matter is that the intent of ProBoards, when providing storage space, is for it to be used in conjunction with their service. By using it otherwise you compromise the ability of ProBoards to provide their service to others, and would -- by my understanding of the TOS -- fall under section 19 (j), interfering with the Service.

It is still up to the person you are paying for the service to determine what the terms of use are for that service, including and up to any extras that may be included.

Yes, I agree, which was why I asked Scott for clarification, as the TOS doesn't cover it. 

BTW - Which PB forum do you run? I'm always interested in seeing other PB Admin's efforts, but the one in your profile isn't a PB forum. 

[Kami]

Jul 1, 2017 10:00:43 GMT -8 Barkley said:

Jul 1, 2017 9:45:26 GMT -8 Kami said:

Barkley , paying for increased attachment space on ProBoards doesn't give you carte blanche ability to do what you will. It is still up to the person you are paying for the service to determine what the terms of use are for that service, including and up to any extras that may be included.

For example, just because a client has purchased my services doesn't mean that they can then -- because they've paid me -- use my services for anything other than what they're intended to be used for. I still retain control over what my work can be used for as per the agreement we both signed (which, in this case, is any user's acceptance of the PB TOS and Community Guidelines).

Now far beit for me to dictate the Terms of Service (of course) but I was simply offering perspective on why it's not a simple course of action to decide and even discuss whether or not ProBoards should also become an image host in addition to a forum host.

The fact of the matter is that the intent of ProBoards, when providing storage space, is for it to be used in conjunction with their service. By using it otherwise you compromise the ability of ProBoards to provide their service to others, and would -- by my understanding of the TOS -- fall under section 19 (j), interfering with the Service.

It is still up to the person you are paying for the service to determine what the terms of use are for that service, including and up to any extras that may be included.

Yes, I agree, which was why I asked Scott for clarification, as the TOS doesn't cover it.  :)

BTW - Which PB forum do you run? I'm always interested in seeing other PB Admin's efforts, but the one in your profile isn't a PB forum.  :)

Section 19(J) covers prohibiting disrupting the Service (ProBoards).

Utilising PB's upload/attachment system outside of its capacity on PB's services results in server strain which in turn disrupts the service. Obviously it may fall under something else, but I do think that it's pretty clear that doing anything that would interrupt the service PB provides is a violation of that, even if it's not done with malicious intent.

And the link to my PB forum is in my signature.

[Skidjit]

Jun 30, 2017 10:20:24 GMT -8 Scott said:

Photobucket has changed their terms of service that affects linking to images stored via their service.

Users of their service will need to read their new terms to see how it affects them and what options, if any, are available. This is a similar action to the terms of service changes imgur.com did a year ago and we posted about it here.


Members that have had issues in updating their forum accordingly due to this recent development have and will post their questions on support. So please:

1) Create your own thread and do not hijack another's.

2) Do NOT post your opinions about Photobucket in these threads! Support threads are for assisting with forum related issues and is not an appropriate place for discussions on Photobucket's recent policy changes.

Thank you.

I take it since tinypic.com is sort of a spinoff of photobucket I'll need to go check tinypic's TOS to see if that's been updated/changed too. I like the shorter url's so I quit using my old photobucket account many years ago. Ugh. At least Photobucket's given us a heads up.... or I hope.

[Kami]

Jul 1, 2017 10:12:33 GMT -8 Skidjit said:

Jun 30, 2017 10:20:24 GMT -8 Scott said:

Photobucket has changed their terms of service that affects linking to images stored via their service.

Users of their service will need to read their new terms to see how it affects them and what options, if any, are available. This is a similar action to the terms of service changes imgur.com did a year ago and we posted about it here.


Members that have had issues in updating their forum accordingly due to this recent development have and will post their questions on support. So please:

1) Create your own thread and do not hijack another's.

2) Do NOT post your opinions about Photobucket in these threads! Support threads are for assisting with forum related issues and is not an appropriate place for discussions on Photobucket's recent policy changes.

Thank you.

I take it since tinypic.com is sort of a spinoff of photobucket I'll need to go check tinypic's TOS to see if that's been updated/changed too. I like the shorter url's so I quit using my old photobucket account many years ago. Ugh. At least Photobucket's given us a heads up.... or I hope.

It doesn't look (as of this post) that TinyPic has prohibited outright the use of their systems but I would be incredibly wary since they are a subsidiary of Photobucket.

[Barkley]

Jul 1, 2017 10:02:26 GMT -8 Kami said:

Jul 1, 2017 10:00:43 GMT -8 Barkley said:

Yes, I agree, which was why I asked Scott for clarification, as the TOS doesn't cover it. 

BTW - Which PB forum do you run? I'm always interested in seeing other PB Admin's efforts, but the one in your profile isn't a PB forum. 

Section 19(J) covers prohibiting disrupting the Service (ProBoards).

Utilising PB's upload/attachment system outside of its capacity on PB's services results in server strain which in turn disrupts the service. Obviously it may fall under something else, but I do think that it's pretty clear that doing anything that would interrupt the service PB provides is a violation of that, even if it's not done with malicious intent.

And the link to my PB forum is in my signature.

Kami, I asked Scott for clarification. 

[Kami]

Jul 1, 2017 10:17:42 GMT -8 Barkley said:

Jul 1, 2017 10:02:26 GMT -8 Kami said:

Section 19(J) covers prohibiting disrupting the Service (ProBoards).

Utilising PB's upload/attachment system outside of its capacity on PB's services results in server strain which in turn disrupts the service. Obviously it may fall under something else, but I do think that it's pretty clear that doing anything that would interrupt the service PB provides is a violation of that, even if it's not done with malicious intent.

And the link to my PB forum is in my signature.

Kami, I asked Scott for clarification.  :)

Oh, yes, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I was putting forth a definitive staff answer! Sorry if it came across like that (: