https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/30/photobucket_charging_400yr_3rdparty_pgs/
QuotePhotobucket is cracking down on people embedding on third-party websites images it hosts, until now, for free.
The photo-slinging internet elder now says that anyone who wants to use its service to display photos it hosts on other pages – such as signature banners in forum posts – will now need to open up their wallets and plop down $399.99 a year for a subscription plan.
The new policy will be particularly annoying to longtime users who have relied on Photobucket's 14-year-old service to host the images they use to place images on forums or in blog posts.
Luckily I use imgur. xD
Lets just hope imgur doesn't do the same.
But $400 a year? I think that's a bit extreme for a photo hosting site.
That price is exorbitant. It's like they want to go out of business.
Could easily afford photoshop for that amount of money I think xD
Most people will just move. The biggest shame is how many old websites and forums will become unreadable if they start deleting old images.
I'm not really sure what use photobucket would be to anyone these days without support of 3rd party hosting.
What they should have done (IMO) is charged $5 a year and added a watermark on 3rd party hosted images unless a (slightly) higher fee is paid.
It's a strangely high price, surely anyone who uploads $400 worth... Isn't going to be using photobucket.
With $400 I might as well get a PS4 and Battlefront.