Schmap Schmapple

Sometimes Free of Charge is not the same as Not for Profit.

I was approached my Schmap this week with a request to use one of my images on Flickr, for free, with the promise of some form of reciprocal links.

The premise of their offer is that they provide the city guides and maps for free to the end user, and aren't they a nice bunch of guys who are providing a useful service for free to the end user. So therefore they shouldn't have to pay you for the use of your image, because hey, it's a free guide isn't it?

I thought about this, and my answer has got to be a resounding NO. For the reason that despite what they claim, they are not providing the resource for free. What they are providing is advertising disguised as a city guide and for this they are being paid large amounts of money.

So while the end user of the maps may not be paying for your image, Schmap are getting paid hansomly by the advertising companies. So why should someone else profit from my images and I get nothing in return. It doesn't make sense to me.

I think that the part I objected to most was the way that Schmap were not clear and open that they were going to profit from your image, while you get nothing.

Now, note that this is very different from Not for Profit. If an charity or NGO approached me asking to use one of my images on Flickr to promote a cause that I agreed with, or as part of an information pack, then that is a very different proposition where the only people profiting are those that the charity is trying to help.

And if it is exposure that you are looking for, seeing your picture up on the web, being appreciated and helping others, then there is always Wikipedia. Get out there, sign up with a user ID and submit your image, for free and not for profit.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CaltonHillDugaldMonument.jpg