[rushingcreek]

We'd love to partner directly with content creators. This is something we're thinking about a lot and are having conversations on how to go about it.

I will also personally do everything in my power to keep us from running ads on Phind. I want to keep Phind honest and authentic, and will do everything I can to make it a net positive for the internet.

[Maxion]

By displaying other peoples images that you do not have a license for you are breaking copyright law and are open to lawsuits.

[LouisSayers]

I'm no lawyer, but the law is nuanced when it comes to copyright.

Fair use exists which permits usage of copyrighted content in certain situations.

I'm not saying that they aren't in violation, just that copyright doesn't automatically ban others from using your material - it typically (laws are different in every country) depends on how (and how much of) your material is used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

[dougb5]

Could you change your product to only show images that have Creative Commons licenses? https://daminion.net/articles/tips/how-to-use-images-legally...

[viraptor]

I'd love it if the BAT / Flattr / Coil style idea actually started working. Flattr failed to get attention from the actual users, but it could be revived to pay the website creators from "indirect visits" like using their content in phind or perplexity. (in addition to continuing the direct payments)

[dingnuts]

>I want to keep Phind honest and authentic

Choosing to violate the copyright of content creators sure is a funny way to be honest or authentic.

[econ]

If such a place exists you could serve an ad only where it is extremely useful given the current context.

I've only seen this once.

[amelius]

Sounds like: asking for forgiveness is better than asking for permission ...