> How do you expect Flickr to differentiate from you and someone else who wants to rip off your content?
Any photographer or artist who really doesn't want their images shared should not make them available on the internet. Period. Given the capabilities of current computing platforms, there exists no method by which you can restrict redistribution.
Er... just because you can't prevent something by technical means, doesn't mean you shouldn't try to prevent it by social means.
For example: There's no technical way I can prevent you from slandering me, short of preventing all of your speech. However if you do slander me, and I find out about it then I can take you to court.
The nopin setting just enforces a gentlemans agreement between Pinterest and the site in question. If the Pinterest user really wants to share that picture, all they have to do is copy the link and do it manually.
This is a good point. If you don't want your photos seen by others, don't put them on Flickr. If you want to sell highres versions of your photos, only put lowres versions up. So long as things are properly attributed and only low-quality images are stored/used, I see this as Fair Use.
Any photographer or artist who really doesn't want their images shared should not make them available on the internet. Period. Given the capabilities of current computing platforms, there exists no method by which you can restrict redistribution.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.