envato and copyright

[click_click]

Oh dear:
http://graphicriver.net/item/power-posterflyer-template/149732?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=sevenstyles

It's not so much the obvious ones like the one here and the Getty example that bother me. Its how many of our stock photos appear on the templates generally, and the fact that with this culture on the site where obvious violations are ignored, it promotes the idea that it is fine (and legal) to use other people's images to promote your templates without permission or paying.

You can bet that none/ very few of these lower profile images have actually been paid for.

And these guys have massive download numbers 

To be fair, despite the illegal use of other people's photographs, some designs are really good. I wonder though how much of those are ripped off from other designers... 

[Snufkin]

UNBELIEVABLE 

[Microbius]

http://graphicriver.net/item/nightclub-flyerposter-vol-4/162762?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=indieground
http://graphicriver.net/item/indie-flyerposter-vol-7/239815?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=indieground
http://graphicriver.net/item/comic-book-creation-kit/708592?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=erengoksel
and from the best selling author on the site:
http://themeforest.net/item/classica-minimalistic-wordpress-portfolio-theme/155672?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=OrmanClark
and
http://themeforest.net/item/gridlocked-minimalistic-wordpress-portfolio-theme/245947?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=OrmanClark

[vtaeed]

Hi Folks,

Thanks for bringing up the question of copyrighted assets in preview images. It's very clear that we should do more to educate our contributor community about licensing. I've just had a meeting with our CEO and legal counsel to work out how we can best do this.

It seems that images shown in some of the previews mentioned have most likely not been licensed properly. I've let our support team know, and the items will be removed from the site and the relevant contributors will be contacted.

For clarity, our policy on the marketplaces is that contributors are responsible for appropriately licensing images (and other assets) to be used in both previews and items for sale. We have provided a free asset library for some time for contributors to use, though it's fairly limited. And of course licensing stock photography appropriately is also a common and acceptable way to demonstrate previews.

When we are made aware of any item that is infringing someone else's copyright, we act to take down the item and notify the contributor.

When an contributor uploads an item for sale they must agree/assert that it is their own work or they have an appropriate license:

"Any images, sounds, video, code, flash, or other assets that are not my own work, have been appropriately licensed for use in the file preview or main download. Other than these items, this work is entirely my own and I have full rights to sell it on ThemeForest."

On our upload instructions and pages we provide links to documentation like this article "What images, videos, code or music can I use in my items?" http://wiki.envato.com/selling/tips-selling/what-images-videos-illustrations-or-music-can-i-use-in-my-items/

Misuse of other people's IP is not the intention of our marketplaces at all.

There's a lot to do to improve the marketplaces, so I'm grateful that the community pushes for action on important issues like this one.

I know some of you have already referred to our T&Cs regarding how seriously we take intellectual property, and want to assure you that you will see actions that back up our intent of respecting the intellectual property of others.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, we will be looking to see how best we can address the wider issue and educate contributors to keep their items clean and clear. I think we can do more to encourage them to use our asset library, creative-commons licensed photos, and of course licensed stock photography in particular.

In my experience a big push with the contributors yields good results. Most contributors want to do the right thing, and have most likely failed to understand the issues involved.

If you have any questions, please let me know. I'll add this thread to email notifications so I hear about any subsequent posts.

Thanks

[Microbius]

Thank you for taking the time to reply and for taking the issue seriously (though obviously it would have been better if this had been the case from the outset, which given the attitude of reviewers to letting clearly infringing content through to the site it has not been)

As the stance of Envato on this has now changed, please inform your authors of where you now stand. Previous warnings in the context of the general attitude of staff and contributors on the site have unsurprisingly not been taken seriously. Had I read your terms on this then looked at the content on the site I would think it was in the same category as disclaimers on Megaupload and the like, issued at best with a wink and a nod.

An email and announcement on the forums asking authors to go through their portfolios and make sure all images used in previews are correctly licensed for commercial use would be a good start. Without concrete action any statement seems as laughable as the one in your terms and conditions.

ETA, just clicked back on some of the links I posted, some of the ones with celebrity photos have been featured on the site. You need to educate your staff as well as your authors, top to bottom

[vtaeed]

Thanks Microbius - completely agree with your sentiment particularly about "concrete action".

This forum response was only one of several outcomes following on our meeting.  Over the next couple of days we'll be investigating the complaints listed here and in parallel also be working on educating our community through several different avenues.

[click_click]

Out of curiosity I would like to know how contributors of infringing products are being "educated" or "dealt with" beacuse of their wrongdoing?

I'm referring to contributors that uploaded dozens of designs (in each of their portfolio) using (most likely) unlicensed content, achieving huge numbers of sales.

I don't know one stock photo agency that would not ban the contributors in question because they obviously and blatantly broke the contributors terms.

Not to mention that the reviewers also didn't do their job of understanding that for example no one except Marvel Comics can publish their content. This is an issue on multiple levels.

Being a new Envato contributor, I feel like it is a hit and miss to find and weed out infringing contributors (only being discovered by reports of others). Otherwise, they will keep on selling with a big marketing boost from illegally obtained/used content.

I have no clue, while all stock photo agencies (now) require model and property releases (even for public buildings, tattoo artists etc.) when Envato just massively waves through Hollywood content without any documentation/proof of rights for redistribution. Looks like don't ask don't tell to me.

I don't want to sound like a kid whose lolly has been taken away but I can't shake off the feeling that this is a big deal.

[Microbius]

I am hoping that they will at least ask for verification of where stock photos were purchased with the corresponding image numbers so it can be followed up in case of a dispute (in much the same way as IStock asks for source files for illustrations)

I would advise anyone that spots their photos being used to contact the authors in question and ask them where they purchased the license from and check your sales!

In these sorts of cases I go for an email thanking them for purchasing my content and asking, just for my records, if they could specify where and when they purchased the license from.

I do have some sympathy for the authors, I have zero sympathy for the site, because their attitude has totally mislead their authors. I mean this isn't like a site that can hide behind not knowing it was going on. EVERY FILE HAS PASSED THROUGH THE HANDS OF A REVIEWER!!!
Many have additionally been included in news letters, picked out to be featured, even linked to from this forum by Envato staff to boast about their sales all while blatant IP theft was going on.
Disgusting.

I just hope that the response from the site now is strong enough to make up for it.

[stormchaser]

Wow +1.  They need to change attitude and sort this out quick.

Apparently not

http://graphicriver.net/item/advance-comics-publication-bundle/1180517?WT.ac=category_thumb&WT.seg_1=category_thumb&WT.z_author=mrcharlesbrown

Still for sale at this writing.

[Microbius]

Oh dear:
http://graphicriver.net/item/power-posterflyer-template/149732?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=sevenstyles

It's not so much the obvious ones like the one here and the Getty example that bother me. Its how many of our stock photos appear on the templates generally, and the fact that with this culture on the site where obvious violations are ignored, it promotes the idea that it is fine (and legal) to use other people's images to promote your templates without permission or paying.

You can bet that none/ very few of these lower profile images have actually been paid for.

And these guys have massive download numbers  

To be fair, despite the illegal use of other people's photographs, some designs are really good. I wonder though how much of those are ripped off from other designers...  

I agree that some of the designs are very good. But if you look at the portfolios of some of the top flyer designers on the site some have basically the same designs repeated many times with the main differentiation being which celebrity photo or movie poster they have used in that specific file. That's how much of the "selling" is being done by other artists' hard work.

e.g.   http://graphicriver.net/user/sevenstyles

[Karimala]

Despite the reassurances of meetings with the CEO and attorneys, sure seems like Envato is continuing to play with fire.  All it would take is someone notifying Marvel or a movie studio about the massive amount of infringements, and next thing you know a huge lawsuit is filed that would eventually bankrupt the company.

[Microbius]

http://graphicriver.net/forums/thread/an-appeal-to-gr-authors/58116?page=1

Just seen that another member has now bought the same thing up on their forum. Again with very disappointing lack of clarification from the site and a misinformed moderator muddying the water:
Quote
"The responsibility of copyrighted materials within items is left up to the individual author, the movie companies / vodka companies would need to send in a DMCA .
A lot of stock is only used for preview purposes anyway and not being �sold�."

The issue isn't the resale of the images, it is the commercial use of them without license or permission.

ETA also, in the end is the content posted by authors? or is it actually posted by reviewers?

[stormchaser]

http://graphicriver.net/forums/thread/an-appeal-to-gr-authors/58116?page=1

Just seen that another member has now bought the same thing up on their forum. Again with very disappointing lack of clarification from the site and a misinformed moderator muddying the water:
Quote
"The responsibility of copyrighted materials within items is left up to the individual author, the movie companies / vodka companies would need to send in a DMCA .
A lot of stock is only used for preview purposes anyway and not being �sold�."

The issue isn't the resale of the images, it is the commercial use of them without license or permission.

ETA also, in the end is the content posted by authors? or is it actually posted by reviewers?

That's horse hockey (envato's statement) and everyone with a professional publishing background knows it.

[Microbius]

I've only just started reading their forums and it's really depressing. Seems like they have a lot of kids over there that think any kind of image theft is fine and with no guidance from the site it's just like watching ping pong between them and the more serious designers that know their copyright and IP law.
Another quote from their MOD:
"A thread like this appears every few months, with the same arguments and responses�"

Welll duh, why not have a member of staff that knows what they are talking about actually state You need a commercial license to use other people's images in your previews

It's like it's all just a matter of opinion. I know that's a general problem with the internet, everyone chimes in irrespective of their ignorance but you'd hope that a stock site would clarify it for their artists.

It seems increasingly likely that the statement Envato made on here is total BS.

ETA that post also goes to show just how long they have known about it and that their reviewers are still not exercising due diligence. They keep saying it's like YouTube etc. but again, YouTube has the (lame) excuse that they can't possibly know what is being posted due to the massive volume. On Envato they know exactly what is going up on the site because every upload is reviewed and ultimately posted by a reviewer (company employee)

Double ETA someone needs to reference this thread on their thread so authors can at least get to read the official statement from Envato staff posted here (that they have never bothered to post when the issues are raised on their own site)

[stormchaser]

Welll duh, why not have a member of staff that knows what they are talking about actually state You need a commercial license to use other people's images in your previews

Because they're making small gobs of money with them. Yeah the little productions are slick, but they sure would be using other people's images and characters. Get a camera, shoot the images yourself, then call yourself an "Artist". Of course the real trick would be shooting an image of John Lennon.

I'm not a member there and if I was I would post his over there. Image misuse, or in this case downright flagrant theft of intellectual property, simply annoys me. Signs of true amateurs.

And the Youtube excuse, yeah that's a lot of crap too and that doesn't wash anymore.

[cook]

Ok Im new here but here is what I have found

It all started when I was looking at a new poster that had been submitted by HypeDesignStudios here is the poster in question http://graphicriver.net/item/burlesque-flyer-template/788568 . In the description at the bottom you will see he tells the users where he got his stock images from "Any stock images used in this design can be found at: www.officialpsds.com " Now I have used Offical Psd's in the past for my own personal work but this site is not a creditable source for stock imagery as it is a resource site that allows illegal content to be uploaded even though it has disclaimers saying otherwise (cut out images of anyone famous can also be found on this site and I highly doubt that is is the original author of the picture putting it up). Doing a quick google image search or tineye will clearly point this out. Here is the cut out file of cards on OP http://officialpsds.com/Flying-Cards2-PSD29258.html and here is the tineye http://www.tineye.com/search/9506406ca19147a7ea7f84a82c7a3cd3362a5abc/ you will clearly see that the cards were against a different background until they were cut out and yet again I highly doubt that the author on OP is the owner of the original file.

So then I noticed on OP that I had seen a lot of the images in GR items one author being Sevenstyles so I started doing trace backs on the images used within his files and there was one that stood out form the rest. http://graphicriver.net/item/control-flyer-template/397428 in this file there is a diamond skull used with a diamond crown which can be found here on OP http://officialpsds.com/Diamond-Skull-PSD31994.html the skull is by damien hirst  and by doing a Google search on the image we will notice that the skull with the crown doesn't appear anywhere besides OP.

Here is another Poster by sevenstyles http://graphicriver.net/item/tranquil-flyer-template/405226 the fruit can easily be tracked back to OP

pineapple
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Tasty-Pineapple-HQ-IMG-PSD63703.html
original source: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/image-5798739/stock-photo-annanas

kiwi
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Cocktail-PSD28366.html
original source: http://mailfor.deviantart.com/art/FreshCok-18352642

Strawberry
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Strawberry-PSD51853.html
original source: http://smurffette.deviantart.com/art/strawberry-3-49929686

And another poster http://graphicriver.net/item/kingdom-flyer-template/713776

Crown
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Crown-PSD59837.html
original source: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-15300034/stock-photo-a-king-s-golden-crown-on-a-white-background-includes-clipping-path.html

money falling
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Money-Falling-PSD59600.html
original source: google search

Speaker (colour changed)
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/speaker-2-PSD42324.html
original source: google search

One more poster http://graphicriver.net/item/metalheartflyer-template/717703

Car
Official psd's: http://officialpsds.com/Black-car-stock2167.html
original source: google search

All images in Sevenstyles posters can be tracked on Official Psd's site.

Trust me there are many more and it is not just limited to this 2 authors. I have used stock images in my own files and link back to any images that are used as is stated by a creative commons licence and I see it a little unfair that some authors do not do this. I think that a link to where the image was purchased/ gotten from should be included in the submission to the reviewer to prevent this from happening and in the long run avoid GR or Evanto getting into trouble for copyright infringement (this is something I would not like to see happen). Also that Offical Psd's is not used a stock site for GR or any other Envato marketplace. I also understand that some of the images above are not on stock sites but the fact of the matter is there is also no licence/extended licence or proof of permission granted to use them, just because an image is on the net does not make it public domain as someone somewhere created it.


poster http://graphicriver.net/item/alienkiller-flyer-template/482601
op:http://officialpsds.com/SWORDS-PSD24880.html
tineye: http://www.warhammeronline.com/conceptart/conceptArt_2007.php

It is the first sword in the image that is used in the poster which is concept art from Warhammer online http://www.warhammeronline.com/conceptart/conceptArt_2007.php I noticed this instantly

There are more and more users using Official PSD
here is another http://graphicriver.net/item/tropical-summer-madness-party-flyer-poster/950164

and this guy http://graphicriver.net/item/sylvester-2012-party-flyer-template/946342

I would also question is the image of the bottle of Smirnoff in the download?

and finally can someone tell me how this got in http://graphicriver.net/item/gangsters-in-black-mixtape-or-flyer-template/931457?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=HypeDesignStudios

[Microbius]

Thanks for taking the time to post here. As I have said before, sad that Envato is going down the line where they will be in the same category as  officialpsds.com A shady site that exploits loopholes to sell illegal content, rather than as a site that truly cares about protecting the work of the design and art community. Very sad.
We can only hope that they adopt best practice rather than just trying to cover their a**

They need to take a look at how the market leading sites do it. IStock, Dreamstime etc. demand proof of your source files for illustrations. All the other legit stock sites will investigate any possible copyright infringements, not just wait for DMCAs from owners.
I guess maybe their lawyers have realized that when you repeatedly pass blatant infringements to go up on the site via a review team that you train, a little tickbox isn't going to save you.

[cook]

I also noticed that any items that have been included in this thread have be removed from GR or put into Soft Disable

like this link from above http://graphicriver.net/item/power-posterflyer-template/149732?WT.ac=portfolio_thumb&WT.seg_1=portfolio_thumb&WT.z_author=sevenstyles

but the item is also included in this bundle
http://graphicriver.net/item/power-flyer-bundle/224512
so should this be removed also?
infact if you ask me most of the offending authors work should be removed as most uses iconic/famous images to promote and sell.

[Microbius]

Reading that thread on Envato looks like they are finally pulling all the files!
I like to think this thread had something to do with it, but more likely the fact that Getty employees and those of other companies infringed read this forum had more to do with it than anything we regular peons said.

[cook]

I would believe that this forum had a lot to do with it.

I think on the GR forums it is just seen as authors moaning and not professionals giving head strong advice on best practice and law.

[Karimala]

Well done, Cook.

What y'all are reporting about the forums is simply amazing.  Envato is 100% not protected by the DMCA, as I mentioned in a previous post.  I've been meeting with several copyright attorneys for a month now discussing these very types of issues, and what I'm saying is absolutely true.  Ain't just another internet opinion on my end.  All of these companies with images being infringed upon are based in the US, and can and will sue under the US Copyright Act and Digital Millennium Copyright Act, because Envato and its various websites have failed to register as an Interim Designated Agent authorized by the Copyright Office to accept notification of copyright infringements without further liability.  Without this registration in place, they do not qualify for the limitations of liability guaranteed in the US Copyright Act.

Copyright Act Section 512(c) states:

(2) Designated agent. � The limitations on liability established in this subsection apply to a service provider only if the service provider has designated an agent to receive notifications of claimed infringement described in paragraph (3) [my note: a DMCA notice], by making available through its service, including on its website in a location accessible to the public, and by providing to the Copyright Office, substantially the following information:

(A) the name, address, phone number, and electronic mail address of the agent.

(B) other contact information which the Register of Copyrights may deem appropriate.

It's this section which protects agents like Shutterstock or YouTube or Google or iStock or Getty.  They are all registered.  Envato is not.  http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/e_agents.html

[Karimala]

Certainly good news they are finally pulling files. 

[cook]

Some authors are a little confused to what is going on
http://graphicriver.net/forums/thread/soft-disable/58233?page=1#523883

[Karimala]

I would believe that this forum had a lot to do with it.

MSG rocks!  

Scroll down to Matu's post where he says he stumbled upon this thread...

http://graphicriver.net/forums/thread/an-appeal-to-gr-authors/58116?page=5

And this quote on page 6:

The thread which Matu has quoted from includes many people saying things like �look at how this file is breaking copyright� etc. EVERY SINGLE LINK they put on there now links to a dead page, i.e. the item has been temporarily disabled (including some from the top author here). These aren�t from a few shady authors either � files pulled include Orman Clarks best selling WP theme and work by SevenStyles.

Thank you, Envato, for listening to us.

[Microbius]

....or to Getty/ Sony's Lawyers, either way, good that they have been pulled.
Also good for the artists who have had work pulled as it protects them too