I worked in publishing pictures from 1974-1990. My knowledge is out of date. Having said that, I don’t think that the general stuff has changed.
Copyright in a picture exists up to fifty years after the death of the artist. I guess it’s the same for photos. That isn’t a huge amount of time.
Most art doesn’t make much money, with or without copyright.
USA: “As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years.”
( How Long Does Copyright Protection Last? (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office )
Canada changed to life + 50 to life + 70 less than two years ago: “Please be advised, on December 30, 2022, the general term of copyright protection in Canada changed from 50 to 70 years after the death of the author. This change does not affect works that are already in the public domain.”
( Copyright )
Personally, I was disappointed in Canada’s change. I think life + 50 was already a bit excessive.
…or the descendants of the creator of the work.
As @elGordo points out, it’s now life plus 70. I would argue that that is a very long time!
The purpose of copyright is to allow creators to make a living. I certainly wouldn’t consider becoming a professional photographer if I knew my work would be immediately free for anyone to take and do with what they please.
Knowing that most art doesn’t make much money, and of the work that does, most of the money is made in the first few years after creation, a copyright term of 10 or 20 years would protect 95% of the earning potential of 95% of the work out there. Where exactly to draw the line is a tricky question. Most of us have a 40-60 year professional life, that seems like a good ballpark to work with.
Compare that to Life plus 70. If I make something at 30, and live until I’m 70, that work will be copyrighted for 110 years. That’s four or five generations from now. How many of us expect to be rewarded for work done by our great great grandparents?
In theory, yes. In practice, media giants like Disney find ways to abuse copyright to the detriment of creators and the public in general:
Copyright’s power to create worker power has always been oversold, mostly by giant entertainment companies who correctly understood that the more copyright creators got, the more copyright they could expropriate through non-negotiable contracts. Copyright isn’t useless to creators, but it is also no substitute for fair contracting laws, labor organizing, and antitrust enforcement.
(the point is not that copyright is bad, but that it is only good if it is paired with fair contracting from non-abusive corporations)
FWIW, I joined pixelfed.social, and so far my experience has been positive. Following a few hashtags gives me a focused home feed, and allows me to bypass the immature crap in the local and global feeds (it is still social media after all). Nary a crooked horizon, so that’s a start. I haven’t posted any of my own stuff yet, so I can’t comment on that experience.
Interesting. I was trying to figure out how to avoid random dog snaps
Thank you, folk, for the update on copyright laws. Much appreciated.
Deviant art is unfortunately using your art to train its AI. Unacceptable in my eyes. And I’ve had an account there since 5 months after it was publicly available.
The last time I logged in, they had a new checkbox to protect my photos from being used, and it was checked by default.
However, that doesn’t mean I can trust them. Thanks for the heads-up!
It also doesn’t mean they haven’t already used your photos. 
Sad but true.
Boy Flickr was the place for exhibiting photos online about 15 years ago. Now it still has a lot of people posting pictures but there’s not really a community. It seems to be mostly senior citizens there (not saying old people are bad, just that it doesn’t bode well for the future of the site if they’re not getting young blood in on the reg).
I’m not aware of any site for photography that’s like Flickr was back then. The closest is instagram but the focus there is 100% not on photography as an art. It’s more a marketing/modeling portfolio/social media site than a gallery.
Same for the European Union.
That’s a symptom of anxiety disorder or something like that.
Flickr is also cludging up with AI 
in my view.
I can’t remember why now but I went on flickr to join the Lubuntu wallpaper group and then forgot about it so didn’t respond to messages as I should sorry
use mint now, bit freaked out by ubuntu pro
I’ve got quite a lot of photos to upload and may go to the pro option
I’m glad there’s some people I know from the virtual world on there I must look people up
I also failed to avoid random dog photos but be grateful for small mercies nobody’s going to base AI on them , oh maybe not
On balance I think it is good that people have a chance for some creativity with their phones it has meant that my self image as a photographer has gone from Rembrandt to a taxi driver but less ego is always good
I’m trying to imagine the prompt for this:
Hal, create an image of mass suicide by train.
Ha. “I’ll just get on this sideways train and look bored while an oncoming engine T-bones the carriage.”
You can change this by inviting us…
