What surprises me is how many people will give up their work for free when it is obvious that someone else will be making a profit on them. They never stop to think about how much time, effort, and money they put into their pictures. Then there is also the cost of digital storage, a computer, software, camera upgrades, lenses, travel expenses, etc. It is shocking really. With desktop publishing these days, anyone can publish their photos without much effort or cost.

Even forgetting about making a profit for a moment, it seems that many photographers are not even thinking about getting a few extra dollars just help with their next photo trip, even if that is just a bit of change to put gas in the gas tank. It would even be nice just to break even once in a while.

It seems I exagerrated, they aren’t *technically* violating the CC license but they are tricking people into waiving their CC rights. It amounts to the same thing and it’s just as sleazy.

@Ron: Thanks for the link! It’s made for some good reading. I’m surprised by how many people in the Flickr community are eager to give their work away for free, but I guess that’s what happens with amateurs and hobbyists. They’re not expecting or attempting to make money, so the money becomes irrelevant.

I don’t regret it really having read your post but if they ever contact me again, I’ll probably say No.

http://flickr.com/help/forum/47355/

Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

If you don’t give them permission to use your photos, they are not going to violate the license because they don’t want to be sued and they have a bunch of other eager amateur photographers waiting to have their pictures “published”. I think the reason they waffle on whether their enterprise is commercial because they don’t want to us to expect payment from them. To some degree, I think they also expect the “photographers” to publicize their site. I noticed on several blogs of who had been Schmapped that they provided a link back to the photo and thereby the actual guide in which Schmap used their photo. Ridiculous.

My suspicions were raised because for me they picked photos that I honestly don’t think are all that great. Also, I had never heard of Schmap until this and it’s not like they are Frommers, Fodors or Lonely Planet, all of which I respect. Perhaps they are advertising to the photographers as well by “selecting” our photos.

I was a little baffled by the audacity of that move.

If they were linking my photo and saying “hey, can we use this?” I wouldn’t be so annoyed, but they aren’t so I am.