The photo is evidence of the observation made by the iNatter (much prefer that term to “user”!). It stands to reason that a photo copied from a book (or elsewhere on the net) is not evidence of the actual individual observed, but a photo taken by someone else that was there would count as evidence that it was observed there. As long as it is a photo of the actual organism seen, and assuming the “owner” of the photo gives permission to use it, then it would be appropriate evidence!
If there were 10 people all gathered around the same thing, all taking photos and putting up observations of the same organism, then that is definitely fulfilling the goal of iNat! People connecting and sharing a passion for the natural world, encouraging and supporting one another in that pursuit… I would happily ID those 10 observations… if it is obvious they are the same individual, then it is even easier to ID the subsequent observations, especially if they all upload at around the same time as well!
It would be courteous to give details in the case of a shared photo, and perhaps even link to other peoples observations of the same thing, but not all iNatters are that tech savvy or tech passionate to do so…
Please do not upload photos taken by other people, since they don’t represent your own experiences and probably represent a violation of copyright law
No, this part is referring to photos found elsewhere, like online or in a book. It doesn’t refer to photos that do represent your own experience, such as when you’re out birding with your friend/partner/whatever and just didn’t take a photo yourself.
No offense meant, but that is just your interpretation. If that is the actual definition then it should be clarified accordingly. There was just a whole long discussion about whether a photo of a photo counts and this would come under the same category in my opinion.
Furthering my opinion. iNat says one of it’s main purposes is to get people out to observe nature, well then this becomes sort of a hobby for some people. As a “hobby” you buy the equipment necessary to partake in your hobby, in this case - a camera. If you can’t afford a camera, then set up a joint account with the person taking the photos with you. The idea of two accounts sharing duplicate photos, just seems pointless.
Scott’s message which I cited 3 messages up makes it very clear that sharing photos (when credited and they do represent what each person saw) is permitted. Given that Scott is the CEO of iNaturalist, I feel his view probably carries the day.
If you feel it is still unacceptable, then I would suggest submitting a feature request to ban it officially and see what traction it generates.