pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Image theft  (Read 17617 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: September 29, 2006, 10:25 »
0
Galastock - your contact details say you are owned by Fotki SAI.  Are you owned/associated with ww.fotki.com.  If not, why have you using the same name as a large US company which also runs a photo website (photosharing rather than microstock).


Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #51 on: September 29, 2006, 10:31 »
0
I think it's time to let this "site" die.  We have more than enough evidence that, at the least, there is no image security.  At the worst, it's run by outright scammers.

Actually, the people I worry about are the buyers, who may have used credit cards and are now at serious risk of identity and credit theft.

« Reply #52 on: September 29, 2006, 10:58 »
0
I honestly don't think we should trust your definition of "theft."  The reason I never joined your site is that parts of your user agreement were lifted verbatim from CanStock.  Whenever you plagiarize another person's work, as your site did with that user agreement, it is theft.

You have no credibility with me.

This his action posting stolen images on Fotolia of course is theft! But as result of this awful situation we revise our staff, we have fired this stupid whipper-snapper who do not understand what is internet, what is serious business there!
We apologise  to all victims of it! And I would like to assure you that such awful situation is not possible for us in future!

I think this is the clincher for me... and makes me not want to upload to galastock.  Rather ironic as well.
The site which had a  problem with one of it's employees stealing images, has itself stolen a contract from another stock site..  Both actions seem sort of similar.

« Reply #53 on: September 29, 2006, 11:00 »
0
I think it's time to let this "site" die.  We have more than enough evidence that, at the least, there is no image security.  At the worst, it's run by outright scammers.

Actually, the people I worry about are the buyers, who may have used credit cards and are now at serious risk of identity and credit theft.

giving galastock the benefit of the doubt, i think any site could be victim of the same situation.  An employee seeing a basket full of images, and deciding to take a few and try to make a few bucks.  I don't think that alone makes them fraudulent.  However it doesn't encourage me to upload images either.

« Reply #54 on: September 29, 2006, 12:01 »
0
What bothers me isn't so much that it happened, but the response to what happened. :(

« Reply #55 on: September 29, 2006, 12:16 »
0
What bothers me isn't so much that it happened, but the response to what happened. :(

Ditto.  Stuff happens; its how you deal with it that matters.

Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #56 on: September 29, 2006, 12:40 »
0
Tyler, your concern that we treat the Galastock site fairly--and your general ethical stance (obvious from how you post to the site) do you credit.  You and the others here are the reason I've stayed, while largely abandoning other sites.  I prize honesty and ethics above all else.

BUT while I agree that the site could be a victim, I remain concerned and suggest that everyone separate themselves from Galastock.  If the employee could steal the photos, why couldn't another employee steal more sensitive information?  And, given the site's track record with stolen photographer agreements, there's no reason to trust anyone there.

I agree with others--no more startups for me.  Only established sites.  The fewer sites I have to track, the easier and more fruitful this job will be.  And, I will be less worried about theft of my hard work.

giving galastock the benefit of the doubt, i think any site could be victim of the same situation.  An employee seeing a basket full of images, and deciding to take a few and try to make a few bucks.  I don't think that alone makes them fraudulent.  However it doesn't encourage me to upload images either.

« Reply #57 on: September 29, 2006, 12:56 »
0
i think the established sites are going to become more and more prestigious as time goes on and things like this are only going to make the barrier between established sites and start up sites larger.  Established sites are going to have the confidence, sales and quality control one would expect from a site like getty or jupiter images, and the start up sites will have to be staisfied with holidays pictures from everyones point and shoot... and have earnings, quality, and security on par with their images.

« Reply #58 on: September 29, 2006, 13:23 »
0
Just tried the link to Deniss Kolesnikovs' page on Fotolia--turns up empty. Guess Fotolia France finally removed the images. Good riddance.

P__

dbvirago

« Reply #59 on: September 29, 2006, 13:24 »
0
In the irony dept., here is a post I did on another forum on August 9. Guess I didn't wait long enough,

"Did a little research. They operate out of...... Latvia, home to
offshore gaming and money laundering. Also, went there and did a
keyword search using 'beach.' Returned 12 shots by 4 people, all with
east European names. Think I'll wait and see."

« Reply #60 on: September 29, 2006, 15:45 »
0
The more I think about this situation, I believe we have all been witness to a remarkable event. Together, as a community, we have managed to expose a thief and a suspect microstock site. It is a tribute to the Internet, Tyler (leaf) as host of this forum, and all the contributers to the link that we have been able to do this. Good detective work by searching the net and ferreting out the culprit have accomplished a valuable result. It may be a link that should be preserved for historical reference. Kuddos to us all.

JMHO.

Pat

« Reply #61 on: September 29, 2006, 15:59 »
0
More thought, and I may be wading in deep **** here, but maybe taking this thread to the broadcast media might result in the culprit and GalaStock becoming accountable in a legal and/or monetary form. Could save a lot of individual lawsuits for those inclined to take it that far. I just think it's a totally newsworthy event that we have participated in--or, am I living in fantasy land?

P__

« Reply #62 on: September 29, 2006, 16:39 »
0
More thought, and I may be wading in deep **** here, but maybe taking this thread to the broadcast media might result in the culprit and GalaStock becoming accountable in a legal and/or monetary form. Could save a lot of individual lawsuits for those inclined to take it that far. I just think it's a totally newsworthy event that we have participated in--or, am I living in fantasy land?

P__

Probably fantasy land...  ;)

I'm not sure of the laws in Latvia, but I doubt that an international lawsuit would come about from all of this.  Who would have the money to hire a lawyer for something like this?  How much would be gained from the lawsuit (probably nothing)?  How does Latvia treat copyright law?

On top of all of that, the photos were submitted to a French site.  So in which country does the case reside?

« Reply #63 on: September 29, 2006, 16:51 »
0
More thought, and I may be wading in deep **** here, but maybe taking this thread to the broadcast media might result in the culprit and GalaStock becoming accountable in a legal and/or monetary form. Could save a lot of individual lawsuits for those inclined to take it that far. I just think it's a totally newsworthy event that we have participated in--or, am I living in fantasy land?

P__

Probably fantasy land... ;)

Wasn't thinking about an international lawsuit. I was thinking more in the line of exposure, creating guilt, and letting the world know that such actions will not be tolerated--and that the Internet is a powerful tool in crime busting. Sorting out the international **** was not the purpose of my suggestion--exposure of this incident was the purpose.

P__

I'm not sure of the laws in Latvia, but I doubt that an international lawsuit would come about from all of this. Who would have the money to hire a lawyer for something like this? How much would be gained from the lawsuit (probably nothing)? How does Latvia treat copyright law?

On top of all of that, the photos were submitted to a French site. So in which country does the case reside?


Somehow my previous response got garbled.

I was not thinking of an international lawsuit. I was thinking that broadcast media exposure of this incident might put pressure on, and create guilt, in the culprit(s) so that restitution might be made without lawsuits.

P__
« Last Edit: September 29, 2006, 17:26 by pelmof »

« Reply #64 on: September 29, 2006, 17:01 »
0
Fotolia's reputation was put at risk because of this Galastock employee (I suppose that he was an employee since GS admin said that this thief was fired).  It seems that Fotolia's headquarters are in New York.  I did a search, here is the link:

http://www.fotolia.com/info/privacy_policy.php
Fotolia LLC
41 East 11th St
11th Floor
New York, NY 10003

I wish and I hope that Fotolia will pursue this thoroughly via a legal avenue, and ask for some compensation, not only for their site, but for the photographers whose pictures were stolen - no compensation for me BTW...by the way  ;)

Note to Leaf:  the 'image theft' in the fotolia category may be misleading.  I am relieved that you took out GS from the stock links.

« Reply #65 on: September 29, 2006, 17:15 »
0
FYI ;) i have now moved the thead to 'new micro sites' catagory.

« Reply #66 on: September 29, 2006, 18:23 »
0

« Reply #67 on: September 29, 2006, 18:49 »
0
The more I think about this situation, I believe we have all been witness to a remarkable event. Together, as a community, we have managed to expose a thief and a suspect microstock site. It is a tribute to the Internet, Tyler (leaf) as host of this forum, and all the contributers to the link that we have been able to do this. Good detective work by searching the net and ferreting out the culprit have accomplished a valuable result. It may be a link that should be preserved for historical reference. Kuddos to us all.

JMHO.

Pat

Kuddos to ALL of us??? Let's see what happened really:

1. Somebody, Deniss Whoteverhisname, was hired as a image reviewer.
2. He, as most reviewers have to do, depending on the system, had to download the pics on his computer to see them at 100%
3. And decided to keep them and resubmit them, under his name, to another site.
4. And now we blame the site he was working for, even if we have no proof that the management of this site was involved...

Justice, I don't know...
SY

PD It was NOT the first time, I know of at least two previous times more... It didn't end up in a witch hunt like this time because, perhaps, the sites involved were all "established" and none of them a newcomer...

dbvirago

« Reply #68 on: September 29, 2006, 19:03 »
0
A couple of observations.

I don't think off-shore gambling, money laundering, and internet crime migrated to Latvia due to the stellar legal system there. I'd say legal repurcussions, voluntary or otherwise is not happening.

Also, the original Fotolia link went to the French site, but all their sites are mirrored. If you entered the ID on the US or UK site, you'd get the same site in English. I don't think we know where he originally uploaded. I link to the UK site because that was the first one I found, but I could go to the US site and log in and get the same info and views. So I don't think we know where he originally uploaded

dbvirago

« Reply #69 on: September 29, 2006, 19:18 »
0
Chad posted this on another board...

Hello everyone,

 

As most of you know a former employee of another stock agency illegally posted images on the Fotolia website. We were made aware of the potential problem at the end of our business day on Thursday. With further investigation we closed the account of the offending member preventing further uploads and sales. At this time, we are investing our legal options and may wish to press charges.

 

From our calculations, only a few images have been sold and as a result, Fotolia will reimburse the true owners of these images. We appreciate all the help and patience from this community.

 

Fotolia will do everything possible to support any photographer who may wish to press charges. Please feel free to contact me directly with any questions.

 

Sincerely,

 

Chad Bridwell

Director of US Operations

Fotolia.com


« Reply #70 on: September 30, 2006, 03:02 »
0
The more I think about this situation, I believe we have all been witness to a remarkable event. Together, as a community, we have managed to expose a thief and a suspect microstock site. It is a tribute to the Internet, Tyler (leaf) as host of this forum, and all the contributers to the link that we have been able to do this. Good detective work by searching the net and ferreting out the culprit have accomplished a valuable result. It may be a link that should be preserved for historical reference. Kuddos to us all.

JMHO.

Pat

Kuddos to ALL of us??? Let's see what happened really:

1. Somebody, Deniss Whoteverhisname, was hired as a image reviewer.
2. He, as most reviewers have to do, depending on the system, had to download the pics on his computer to see them at 100%
3. And decided to keep them and resubmit them, under his name, to another site.
4. And now we blame the site he was working for, even if we have no proof that the management of this site was involved...

Justice, I don't know...
SY

PD It was NOT the first time, I know of at least two previous times more... It didn't end up in a witch hunt like this time because, perhaps, the sites involved were all "established" and none of them a newcomer...


Wether he was a reviewer or was employed in some other manner we don't know, but that isn't really relevant.

I don't think many people are considering Galastock as the criminal here.  I think what Pelmof was saying however is that galastock has done some things in the past that make a person 'question' their motives.  Since they are new, they don't have much as far as reputation to back them up to start with.  The few things that make ME question galastock are

- when they started their site out, they lifted canstock's user agreement and used it as their own (even forgetting to  take out the name 'canstock' in the wording
- their site looks fairly simple and template-ish
- they are new
- their employee was untrustworthy.

I agree it is not enough to conclude anything definate about the site itself, but it is enough to conclude that I don't want to upload there.  there are so many microstock sites to submit to, I don't need many reasons to choose one away.

« Reply #71 on: September 30, 2006, 03:54 »
0
Latvia is in the EU so I assume they must have a sufficent legal system.

This event points out why we mut be vigilent.  Anyone could buy a SS membership for a month and have 750 proven sellers under their name.  It is just unfortunate that it was an employee of a site (esp. a new site).

I am pending my decision on Galastock to see how this pans out.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
23 Replies
8434 Views
Last post May 27, 2009, 03:25
by MichaelJay
13 Replies
3148 Views
Last post November 10, 2011, 05:54
by Microbius
5 Replies
1759 Views
Last post January 07, 2012, 03:58
by RacePhoto
26 Replies
3156 Views
Last post June 07, 2012, 10:10
by bunhill
16 Replies
1776 Views
Last post October 28, 2016, 14:26
by Luka

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors