Please don’t take this thread as me trying to start a witch hunt - I actually rather like this channel and think it is a great educational resource - but I was watching the most recent uploaded video to Clint’s Reptiles and noticed photos that were simply credited ©iNaturalist.org . I’m assuming it i…

Maybe you are correct, this makes it about as clear as mud but I still think YouTube makes money https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/NonCommercial_interpretation

I also have to disagree. The entire reason Wikipedia won’t accept NC licenses is for precisely the reason you describe, that it precludes use on nearly every major site on the internet, all journalism, etc. NC is a lot more restrictive than most people realize, which is why I’ve never used it myself…

It seems like Clint’s Reptiles has not responded or fixed the issue. Is that correct? Should we try other channels of communication? It looks like your can email them at clintsreptiles@gmail.com .

A couple months ago @lothlin brought attention to the fact that the popular YouTube channel “Clint’s Reptiles” was using lots of photos from iNaturalist without any regard to the licenses for those images. In particular, the channel was crediting the photos to “iNaturalist” rather than the actual ph…

While I do not support IP theft, I will say that I just created a thread about iNat merch, so I clicked on your link to Clint’s merch. Clint’s has a lot of great merch! All kinds of taxonomic nerdery. Although maybe they stole the ideas from somewhere?

[image] zygy: If you would like to complain about this, please email clintsreptiles@gmail.com and clintsreptiles+business@gmail.com . Note that both of these will go to the same email address - the part after the + doesn’t matter, it’s just useful for the person receiving the email.

While I definitely think that the photos need to be credited correctly, does utilizing photos in an educational (albeit monetized) video really constitute commercial use? I leave my photos on non-commercial because I don’t want them to be ripped directly and sold, but I wouldn’t bat an eye if they w…

Any monetised use of an image would constitute commercial use. Individual photographers may not mind their images being used for specifically educational monetised use, but those are exceptions to the rule.

Please reconsider the use of non-commercial licences. They are vague. Some jurisdictions, like Germany, misinterpret them in ludicrous ways, like as only allowing personal use. I think iNat should remove the non-commercial clause from the default licence. It should be CC BY rather than CC BY-NC. I…

Large youtube channel using improperly credited iNaturalist photos

General

zoology123 March 28, 2025, 10:39pm 35

Not good to hear.

Topic		Replies	Views
A Case for Changing the Default License (to not include a NC clause) General	118	8378	February 1, 2021
Preliminary Findings from a Qualitative Study on iNaturalist Users License Choices Show There is a Substantial Portion of iNaturalist Users Who Have "All Rights Reserved" by Mistake General	56	1357	July 8, 2024
If you want people to ask permission before using your photos, DON'T apply a CC license! General	36	2093	April 22, 2023
We want you to license your iNaturalist photos before April 15th! General	84	5279	April 15, 2021
Does copyright law allow you to restrict use of your observations—the data, this is, not the photos? General question	32	3165	July 11, 2023

Large youtube channel using improperly credited iNaturalist photos

Related topics