Recently I heard that a battery grip can enhance the feel of the camera in my hands, besides some people claim that it enhances the stability of the camera if you are trying to put it on a table or something.
So I started to look for a battery grip for my Canon 600D and found the Canon's one to...
"Subject to any applicable account settings you select, you grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free, transferable, sublicensable, worldwide license to use, display, reproduce, re-pin, modify (e.g., re-format), re-arrange, and distribute your User Content on Pinterest for the purposes of operating and providing the Service(s) to you and to our other Users."
@mattdm I finally understand what your issue is, I just don't think it was clearly stated in your comment. Its not with the attribution from SE, but the fact the it gets relicensed with a new incompatible license (which apart from other things, doesn't require attribution)
the idea being that Pinterest, as a company, could use it without attribution
I don't think sharing on Pinterest is a bad idea. I just think that because of the content license Stack Exchange has chosen (which is a) awesome and b) at least partially responsible for SE's success), they need to ask for additional rights to do some things they'd just be able to do outright if they asked for complete ownership of user contributions (as, ironically, Pinterest is doing).
yeh... not sure I see why it is an issue... if you don't like it, withdraw your content and stop using the site, shirley? Isn't that the same for anyone who reproduces / shares your content via something like pinterest
i don't think Pinterest's clause gives them total ownership
I'm still for it from a "I'd like to do it personally" but after discussing with @mattdm in chat, I understand his concerns more. It may be very possible that its simply incompatible. CC BY-SA allows for commercial use but only so long as the use retains a similar license. When its reposted to pinterest, it goes under a new, incompatible license. SE would be breaking an attribution clause, but they would be re-licensing it inappropriately. — rfusca2 mins ago
i might see if I can get my mate to allow me to photograph him taking shots at an airshow (or get him to photograph me) for a blog post later in the year
thinking about trying to do a shot with the body static and showing the lens at various stages of the panning process somehow... dunno whether it would work