> Copyright is primarily about protecting your ecconomic rights

One of those economic rights, somewhat inconvenient to your argument, is charging for editorial usage.

The entire function of what remains of the stock photography economy relies on the basis that usage can be billed for. Not sure how else a photographer is ever going to earn money.

If we get to "it's not as if you were making money out of it before" as an argument, which this is approximate to, then the ability to earn as a photographer is destroyed.

▲

ShinyLeftPad 19 hours ago | parent [-]

I think it is obvious that legal system is adapting to new interests of megacorps. Some time ago they were super pro copyright, but now it's a big big problem for them.

> The blog post is transformative because “the Parker Train Photo is part of a broader work as published in the blog and accompanies fashion guidance, rather than being part of an anthology of the Photographer’s work.”

It reads like it's from parallel universe

	▲	dofm 19 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I know! Totally bizarre —- I think photographers' trade groups are going to have to seek some kind of clarification on that, because it's the end of the profession in the USA otherwise. Bonkers.