[maqr]

Maybe all the buzz about Pinterest is because so many people think that finding an image online makes it publicly redistributable. "Pinning" is just another way of sharing.

I get the impression that there's much wider public acceptance of sharing (pirating?) pictures than music, movies, or software. I don't have a good answer as to why this might be, but I'd be curious what HN thinks.

[elithrar]

> I get the impression that there's much wider public acceptance of sharing (pirating?) pictures than music, movies, or software. I don't have a good answer as to why this might be, but I'd be curious what HN thinks.

Anecdotally, it's because photographs and images are seen as "easier to reproduce" (whether this is true or not is another matter), and therefore possibly easier to justify by those doing the sharing.

That, and there's far less friction to sharing photos/images than video and software.

[eurleif]

Perhaps it's also that photos seem less valuable than songs or movies, since pretty much anyone can take a decent photo? (Decent by the person's own standards, at least; maybe not by a professional photographer's.)

[uiri]

I don't think anyone has ever run into DRM on pictures. Once polaroids became popular, everyone had access to photography which meant that there were few large corporate interests to run propaganda campaigns. There is a clear line between Hollywood films and home movies and I suspect that very few people would feel bad about sharing home movies without the consent of the person/family in/recording the movie compared with how many people would feel some kind of guilt about sharing a feature length blockbuster. So the attitude of the creators and the diversity of creators seem to play a large role in determining public acceptance of sharing certain things.