[jonknee]

I doubt a corp card limit has anything to do with it, this isn't a business product.

[analog]

Because businesses don't need to store images?

I've built an image library for a FTSE100 company. $499 per year for storage and access to a decent API would have looked pretty cheap to be honest.

[blowski]

Because Flickr TOS say you can't have a business account. http://www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157626812125880/

I've seen nothing that says that's changed.

[analog]

That is a random comment in a forum from someone who doesn't represent Flickr.

The actual TOS make no mention of whether you can have a business account or not. In face the best practices page specifically provides guidelines for businesses.

"This guide is intended to help organizations—such as businesses, groups and non-profits—get the most out of Flickr."

http://www.flickr.com/bestpractices/

[Pyrodogg]

http://www.flickr.com/help/website/?search=sell+photos#32257...

[analog]

Businesses do not need to be in the business of selling images in order to have a need to store images.

[blowski]

I just feel safer using Dropbox or Glacier. Flickr seems more like a social network, specialising in photos, and I wouldn't feel comfortable about using a service like that as a backup. As a business, the TOS are just not clear enough about what I can and can't store.

[Pyrodogg]

True, It's just the first thing I think of when "photos" and "business" come up.