MicrostockGroup

I would agree with you.  Do you know it's your image?

Regards,
Adelaide

I guess first you should check with IS and SS to figure out if the usage covered by the terms of use. and if you figured out that they used the image out of the terms than you could either sue them or before that you could contact them and try to make a deal. but in all cases you should get a legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

I haven't looked into that yet.  I think I will now though, despite my apprehensions with IS.  I had success before  with a usage problem on another image - but that time I knew forsure that DT supplied the image - so I only approached them - and they were right on it and the problem was resolved in a reasonable time frame.  But, based on the length of time (2+ months) that IS has been dragging their heels on a ticket I submitted where another IS member is selling a derivative of one of my images - which is still unresolved - my first thought this time was to try and handle it without their 'help'.  I've had better luck getting help from SS in the past - so I will see what they say first, I guess - although I think it's more likely the image was obtained from IS.

I had tried to get information directly from the agent for the fragrance - because I'm pretty reasonable and figured we could discuss matters before getting lawyers involved - but I've been getting the run around.

Thanks for your feedback again.

Thanks for that info JS - I didn't know about the file sharing problems.  Perhaps the designer can show a license they got to use my image in their logo - but I'll never conceed to that, so they will still need to cease use of it.  My real concern is that I don't want to allow them to use it as their logo.  If it was just part of their packaging and promotion but not part of the producto logo, I'd be AOK with the usage.  I was told that the manufactor was "Designer Fragrances" - Bob Coleman.   But I can't get any contact information for him. (He's in the UK) and that the distributor was Jigsaw (I have their UK phone number).  I was hoping the agent would put me in touch (email / phone) with the package designer - but no luck yet.  They could really just change the use to something more acceptable or swap out my lips for another and all would be OK.  I really just want to proctect my copyright.

Ha ha!  Perhaps.  Since it's my very own actual unadulterated lip print, I tend to recognize it even amoung the nearly identical ones - kinda like a finger print, I guess.

looks a hell of a lot like a logo to me.

I like the comment on the bottom of getty images

Getty Images reserves the right to pursue unauthorized users of this image or clip. If you violate our intellectual property you may be liable for: actual damages, loss of income, and profits you derive from the use of this image or clip, and, where appropriate, the costs of collection and/or statutory damages up to $150,000 (USD).

perhaps some of the micros need to make that stuff a bit more prevelant, wouldn't stop everyone but it would stop some people.

Yes that's the origin. Now for a brand name a company can't research all exotic languages but Filipino is spoken by almost 100 million people, and mwah is an official dictionary word and even made it in English slang, probably by the many Filipino expats.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mwah

The word is also identical in all of the dialects of the archipelago. When I saw the photo first, it just looked like another "kisses" greeting card, not like an ad for a fragrance.

Interesting stuff.  I didn't know that about the word.  In the second link from my original post (if you click on the lips as they scroll by), it becomes more obvious that it is being used as a logo of sorts (branding or identity) for the fragrance alongside the other logos for the other brands they represent.

Thanks, everyone. for the feedback.

Just forget about it! Nobody gives a sh*t!
They stole my image for a Hollywood movie and the stock agency didn't even reply my mail.

Don't expect any justice in this business!

I agree about the logo, but what about the word itself? Of course agencies won't run the risk to accept a "mwah" photo since it's a waste of time to litigate the company for using a common dictionary word. But if the company would want to sue the "mwah" greeting card printers, I wish them a lot of success.

Well, I just got the final word on this from Istock, so I'm posting it so it can be used as a 'gauge' of sorts when wondering what Istock would do.

This was Istocks reply:

"We have completed our investigation into this matter and are confident that the image is being used for product packaging purposes which is permitted within the terms of the License Agreement."

NOTE: Istock has only been on this for 2.5 months.

I am a suprised.  The regular license seems way too liberal, IMO, if this is acceptable use.  IMO, it is clearly being used as part of a logo.

 ^{<sarcastic mode on>}
Probably a big client whom IS doesn't want to bother with such minor issues. IS does what is best for us, so surely this will mean more sales to all contributors.
 _{<sarcastic mode off>}