Photobucket Charging $400 to host third party images

[Giftheck]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/30/photobucket_charging_400yr_3rdparty_pgs/

Photobucket 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.

[Luna-old]

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.

[Unit 33]

That price is exorbitant. It's like they want to go out of business.

[William]

Could easily afford photoshop for that amount of money I think xD

[{PLA}gdh92]

Most people will just move. The biggest shame is how many old websites and forums will become unreadable if they start deleting old images.

[Led]

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.

[{PLA}gdh92]

It's a strangely high price, surely anyone who uploads $400 worth... Isn't going to be using photobucket.

[ShadowTrooper293]

With $400 I might as well get a PS4 and Battlefront.