Great View From That Angle
This might not be the most efficient spanking position, but you know there’s a great view from that angle:
A note about attributions and watermarks: This picture comes from another spanking blog, and thus I’d normally provide a link credit. Unfortunately, the owner of that blog has undertaken what I can only view as a selfish uglification program; he’s made it his practice to put a watermark or monogram on “his” images, which I find rather offensive given that these are not pictures to which he has any legitimate claim.
When it comes to vintage porn, all we bloggers are in the same boat; we don’t usually have any specific permission to publish these images and we don’t have any way to get permission from, or even to properly credit, the original photographers and publishers. So, all we can do is provide links by way of credit and thanks to whomever it was made the images available to us. Legalities aside, that’s just good karma.
But branding these images with our own URLS or logos or initials? That’s making an unwarranted and unjustifiable claim to the pictures. Worse yet, it’s a form of damage to the artistic heritage of our little kinky community. By the time I’m done using Photoshop to clean up the mess, any sense of karmic obligation I might feel to provide link credit to the perpetrator tends to have evaporated.
In my years of spanking blogging, I’ve put a ton of images on the web for the first time, and seen them spread (uncredited) all over the internet. Do I like that feeling? No; I’d sure appreciate the acknowledging gesture of a link credit. But they’re not “my” images, which is why you don’t see me slathering a spanking blog URL all over them.
Back in the day when I posted on ABPES I always hated the fact that people would post pictures and not mention the company that made them. Some would get posted with someone else’s copyright. I always posted the name of the company in the header. Normally it was Nu-west. I can understand why Ed Lee takes such a dim view of his pictures being posted.
In reality though I joined a number of sites that I leery of joining because I could see what was really on there because of the postings. I have seen Dallas complain on the spanking tube about his videos being posted without attribution.
Bodack, there are a ton of ways we can all go wrong when we do the internet “cultural remix” thing with pre-internet spanking pictures. There are no perfect answers. I myself often post things without knowing where they came from “originally”, so there’s no way I can give proper credit. In some cases, especially with older stuff, it’s by “anonymous” and always has been, so there’s no way to know and no way to find out. I do my best, and that’s all I can do.
The specific pet peeve, though, that prompted this “note” is about a blogger who’s not doing the best they can do when it comes to attribution; they are putting their own personal initials on images that they did not photograph, did not originally publish, and have no connection to except that they may (I don’t know) have scanned them from paper and put them up on the web. That, to me, is an insult to the people who do deserve the credit. There’s many a time I’m not in the position to give a proper credit (because I don’t know who to credit) and there’ve been other times when I got credits wrong, so I’m not claiming to be a saint on this — but I do my best.
So, that’s my pet peeve. My guess is that this other blogger’s pet peeve is people who use “his” scans without crediting him. And, yeah, that can be annoying; I get that. But I still don’t think that makes it all right for him to put his mark on stuff that’s not his.
Yes, this is a wonderful spanking position! The spanker gets a nice bare bottom to swat and an “eyefull” of the female antomy. Every “nook and cranny” is exposed!! Ouch!! Nice post, thanks.