We also post lots of photography related content on our Daily Post blog. In addition to following specific topics, there’s also the Photography Blogs in Recommended Blogs.

Thanks again for the feedback.

You can follow the steps in this guide on how to add a topic to your reader: http://en.support.wordpress.com/reader/#adding-topics

I was thinking of purchasing one of the more custom designed photography templates at one stage (instead of continuing with a free template). Now I'm not so sure.

I had already purchased a space upgrade only a few weeks ago.

To be honest, I no longer look at Freshly Pressed AT ALL.

My interest lies mainly in Photography and due to time constraints, I reserve my limited spare time to being outdoors taking photos, not on the computer looking at freshly pressed subjects which do not interest me.

2. Post a suggestion for a new theme

Please give us the theme name, a link to view the theme, and—most importantly—why you like it and would love to have it on WordPress.com.

Please search the forum first for a suggestion on the same theme. If it exists, add your vote to the same topic and add a note about why you like the theme. http://en.forums.wordpress.com/topic/how-to-use-the-themes-forum?replies=1

Please can a mod close this thread ... sorry I bloody well asked ...

My no right click argument is this... if I found a picture of mine being hosted on another website WITHOUT my permission, if there is no right click, it is obvious, that the person who stole my works had no intention of contacting me about my works.

If I really wanted to steal your image I would steal it and put it up on an anonymous blog without any notice or protection - then "find" it there. Watermarking is by far the best way to protect images

Your blog is hosted in the US and is subject to US law, including copyright.

Its not that simple. If you upload a work covered by copyright in another country it is still protected by that copyright and under international treaties protected in other countries. Thus I can upload pictures I have taken and they would be copyrighted under UK law - (I explicitly allow non-commercial reuse with attribution).

As you say though the new bill says nothing about right-clicks, it just allows the use of orphan works where a reasonable effort to tradck down the owner has been made (and a similar law is coming to the USA soon). I think that the reaction to the law is a bit paranoid - you can still come forward and assert copyright and have images removed, what you cannot do is seek damages if a reasonable effort to trace you has been made.

People worry about companies not making a reasonable effort, and what constitutes a "reasonable effort" is undefined. It is expected that this will vary, someone using an image in a multi-million dollar advertising campaign would be expected to spend tens of thousands of dollars attempting to trace the owner, but for a "mom & pop" guesthouse using an image of local scenery on a poster just a google image search would probably be sufficient.

Normal copyright law as agreed in international copyright treaties, to which the UK is signatory, grants copyright owners 'the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of [their] works, in any manner or form.' Creators don’t have to apply for this right: it is theirs automatically and without formality. This means that unless it is used under one of the narrowly-defined Fair Dealing exceptions to copyright allowed by these treaties, it is illegal to exploit a copyright work without the permission of its owner.

The EAA Act changes that. Under its provisions it will be legal to exploit a copyright work - photograph, film, text, song, whatever - without the knowledge, permission of, and payment to, its owner.

2. ‘They are intended to help remove unnecessary barriers to the legitimate use of works while preserving the interests of rights holders.’

As we have said earlier, international copyright treaties grant copyright owners 'the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of [their] works, in any manner or form.' If this is an 'unnecessary barrier to the legitimate use of works', quite how are 'the interests of rights holders' being preserved by breaking it? The legitimate interests of foreign rights owners are certainly damaged and their rights breached by this Act.

http://www.stop43.org.uk/pages/news_and_resources_files/photographers_have_just_been_royally.php

My no right click argument is this... if I found a picture of mine being hosted on another website WITHOUT my permission, if there is no right click, it is obvious, that the person who stole my works had no intention of contacting me about my works. By being given the option to disable right clicks, in any theme, adds legal weight to the claim I can make that the person did not contact me to gain permission to use my photos.

If they obtained the image via the page source, or other means, then it is clear that they intended to use the works (which could be for gain) without obtaining my permission.

Sorry I only asked if it was possible to have a no-right click option in themes... I knew for a fact it didn't stop people stealing but it proves your case that they obtained the picture dishonestly.

http://thebppa.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/the-copyright-fight-david-bailey-weighs-in/

And this is from the Register

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/

And Camera Connect

http://cameraconnect.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/enterprise-and-regulatory-reform-bill-gains-royal-assent/

I didn't know about this Bill at all, it is hardly been mentioned in the media.. but I can assure you it really does have an impact on photographers work, irrespective of whether you are from the UK or not.

You see the thing is, with this new bill people can do exactly what you say, remove the metadata and watermark and then claim they didn't know who the creator was so they couldn't contact them.. and they would win the case..