MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Image theft  (Read 17605 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 28, 2006, 16:47 »
0
Hi,

My first post here.

While searching for my name on google, I found some of my pictures credited to someone else. By following the link, I arrived on Fotolia and found 18 of my pictures sold by another contributor there >:(

I've already sent a feedback to Fotolia's admins, but as I have also recognized some pictures of other photographers I know, I just wanted to pass the info so you can check if some of your pictures have been robbed too.

Here's the link to the robber's portfolio :
http://www.fotolia.fr/p/147558

All the best
Erick


« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2006, 17:12 »
0
WOW!! thanks for the heads up, he has 36 of mine >:(

« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2006, 17:15 »
0
I guess that mine weren't good enough to steal!

 ;D

« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2006, 17:30 »
0
WOW!! thanks for the heads up, he has 36 of mine >:(

You're welcome.
Steve, are you the author of the nice "blue eye" ? When I saw this one on the fake porfolio, I was sure I already knew this shot.

Erick

« Reply #4 on: September 28, 2006, 17:40 »
0
Yes that is mine, thanks Erick. ;)


« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2006, 18:31 »
0
Thank you Chad.

« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2006, 18:54 »
0
Thanks Chad !

Of course, I didn't intend to blame Fotolia in any way for this issue. I think it could have happen anywhere else.

Erick

dbvirago

« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2006, 19:08 »
0
Chad, he has some of mine too. Do you need the #s?

« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2006, 19:19 »
0
Thanks Erick for letting me know. He has 32 of my images there !

« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2006, 20:19 »
0
If he had one of mine I'd want to get his name and information so I could sue him for copyright infringement!

dbvirago

« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2006, 20:39 »
0
He's from Latvia. Go for it.

nruboc

« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2006, 20:57 »
0
How do you know he's from Latvia????

Coincidentally, I noticed Galastock is owned by someone in Latvia - go to their contact us form, it shows the address.

Just curious, all those with stolen images, did you submit to Galastock?

« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2006, 21:50 »
0
Someone posted a link to a link to this thread on another forum and thought I would check it out.  And one of my pics was there! And it was one also submitted to galastock.  But is also in my fotolia portfolio, too.  Here are the links.

http://www.fotolia.com/id/1297955
http://www.fotolia.fr/id/1332001

As you can imagine, I am very unhappy about this situation.

Any suggestions on how to respond and who to contact would be greatly appreciated.

« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2006, 22:22 »
0
Yep! He had some of mine too. I have the images on GalaStock also. Wonder if there is a connection?  Shouldn't his account be disabled already?
« Last Edit: September 28, 2006, 22:24 by AreaPhotography »

« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2006, 22:34 »
0
The images he stole from me are on GalaStock, but have never been downloaded there.  Its strange, the images are some of my lowest downloaded anywhere.

« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2006, 22:42 »
0
What could clarify the whole thing very quickly is a statement from the Galastock owner confirming or not that this person had access to their internal files.  It should be easy.

I never joined GalaStock, and I don't have any stolen pictures.

« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2006, 22:59 »
0
Well, I checked the images he stole from me.  The only place I have had these images downloaded from is ShutterStock.  I have them other places, but they are new and have not received any downloads.  Can others who have had their images stolen look to see where they have been downloaded from?  I understand that this may be hard for some of the nicer images he stole.  The 2 images he stole from me are not my best, so I understand that they don't get many downloads.  This also leads me to believe that this is just some loser with no brain.  I have much better images he could have stolen, at least I think so.  I do not think this has something to do with GalaStock, but that is my 2 cents.

« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2006, 23:07 »
0
AreaPhotography, in the SS forum, mrslevite said said:

"It had to come from inside a stock agency because the image has never sold."
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13055&highlight=

That's why I assumed that it was an internal theft.

Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2006, 23:37 »
0
Okay.  This has been going on for about half a day.  This person's portfolio is still up and running.  Why hasn't it been taken down?

None of the images are mine.  And, I don't submit to Galastock, for what it's worth.

nruboc

« Reply #20 on: September 28, 2006, 23:47 »
0
Well, I checked the images he stole from me. The only place I have had these images downloaded from is ShutterStock. I have them other places, but they are new and have not received any downloads. Can others who have had their images stolen look to see where they have been downloaded from? I understand that this may be hard for some of the nicer images he stole. The 2 images he stole from me are not my best, so I understand that they don't get many downloads. This also leads me to believe that this is just some loser with no brain. I have much better images he could have stolen, at least I think so. I do not think this has something to do with GalaStock, but that is my 2 cents.


Hello, downloads doesn't matter. Galastock has access to all your images regardless if they were downloaded or not. You uploaded your images to them. The site is a scam, I could tell that in less than an hour's research and I warned about them before this even came up. I have over 2000 images on ShutterStock and not a single one turned up in this guys portfolio, ShutterStock is legit

« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2006, 01:37 »
0
Since I discovered my stolen images, I tried to investigate further and find a possible source for the "leaked" images. I was first reluctant to talk about Galastock as one possible source, having no real evidence of that fact. But after some search about the thief and after reading all of your posts here and on other fora, I have the bad feeling that Galastock is at least involved in the leak of those photos (wether culprit or not), for the following reasons :

- the stolen photos seem to have in common the fact that they have been submitted to Galastok recently
- one member had a stolen photo which has never sold anywhere (so the leak seems to have an internal source)
- a google search on the thief's name (Deniss Kolesnikovs) gave a few results showing that he seems to be a 21 yo student registered in a sports club in Riga, capital city of Latvia (if it's his real name of course)
- a whois search indicates that Galastock domain name is registered in... Riga, Latvia !!! (as indicated also on the contact form of GS website)

Well I can think of several scenarios, among which :

- the worst case would be that the thief is a Galastock's accomplice (in which case we should reconsider our uploading to GS and worry about all our submitted images)

- if we are inclined to give GS the benefit of the doubt, it could be that they employed some cheap student as reviewers to deal with the huge amount of submissions, and this guy has taken the opportunity to steal our images

- I could also be completely wrong and then you could call me paranod...

Anyway, I just checked on Fotolia, and the guy's portfolio is still online and has even grown from 182 to 203 photos since yesterday... ???

Erick

[Edit] Oh, and I agree with AreaPhotography about the "loser with no brains". He even managed to submit my Japanese Piggybank image twice...
« Last Edit: September 29, 2006, 01:47 by ErickN »

« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2006, 01:50 »
0
If you check out Galastocks owner it says it is owned by FOTKI.  In the US, FOTKI is a large photosharing site.  Has anyone checked if it is the same company that owns it.

I assumed it was like the ownership of Stokxpert where it is (part) owned by Corbis but StockXpert is based in Budapest (new country in the EU mcuh like Latvia)

« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2006, 02:04 »
0

While searching for my name on google, I found some of my pictures credited to someone else.

How did you manage that, if I may ask? Weren't your stolen pictures under the robber's name? So why did they show up?

« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2006, 02:12 »
0
How did you manage that, if I may ask? Weren't your stolen pictures under the robber's name? So why did they show up?


One of google's results was a link to an image search engine page (http://es.inversible.info/search.php?q=paris&l=5&n=100) where I immediatly saw two thumbnails of my Parisian Metro Sign image side-by-side, one with my name under it, and the other with the thief's name.

« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2006, 05:00 »
0
yeah it would be nice to have a response from galastock on this one.

the finger does seem to be pointing in their direction.  I have no images stolen, and no images on galastock.  Does anyone have images stolen and have them NOT on galastock??

« Reply #26 on: September 29, 2006, 05:03 »
0
There seems to be some movement at GS. The thief guy had an account at GS until recently (a few minutes ago), and this account apparently has just been deleted.

Maybe we will finally read from GS staff here ?

[Edit] In fact, some of his images are still accessible there, but one cannot browse his portfolio anymore by clicking his name. (http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFQXE1IW&login=1)
« Last Edit: September 29, 2006, 05:11 by ErickN »

« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2006, 05:10 »
0
In every case that I checked, an image that was stolen and submitted to Fotolia was also on Galastock.  Here is a small sample:

Stolen ImageGalastock
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327304http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFESEVAX
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327293http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFESF1ca
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327295http://www.galastock.com/watering_can/flower_21271.html
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327291http://www.galastock.com/orange_green/cat_21220.html
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327651http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFASF1EW
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327654http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFASF1EU
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327672http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFASF1AW
http://www.fotolia.com/id/1327778http://www.galastock.com/?x=fTgTeF4UAzt4FD4eE0V7flFPLPYGFASFlEU

Coincidence???

At this point, it seems that Galastock is done.  Whether it was the actual owner of Galastock that stole the images, someone that had access to the photos there, or someone that hacked into Galastock's database, the trust between submitters and Galastock is gone.

You might want to start to think about removing your photos from there ASAP (although I'm not sure how much that will help if they have a copy somewhere).

« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2006, 05:41 »
0
Has anyone contacted Galastock?

THis maybe an issue with one of their reviewers.  From my understanding, most sites download full versions to reviewers computers for them to check.  There is then an element of trust with all sites that their reviewers do not keep them on their system.

« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2006, 05:48 »
0
i just sent a message to galastock.. hopefully they can give a response.

« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2006, 05:52 »
0
Has anyone contacted Galastock?

THis maybe an issue with one of their reviewers. From my understanding, most sites download full versions to reviewers computers for them to check. There is then an element of trust with all sites that their reviewers do not keep them on their system.

CJ--GalaStock doesn't respond to email contacts. I've tried to contact them regarding their lengthy review times and small per-day upload limits--that was a week ago and no response. I have just deleted my small 57 image portfolio--22 of which were online, and 35 pending review for 3 weeks. I'm done with them. But, they may not be done with me as they may still have my images somewhere in their files. :-[

Pat

« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2006, 06:33 »
0
Dear all!!!

It is really awful incident!!! Deniss Kolesnikovs WAS our employee till today's morning... :'( He had account on galastock as photographer... But after this incident he was fired! It's was of course my fault, as his chief ...

« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2006, 06:54 »
0
Dear all!!!

It is really awful incident!!! Deniss Kolesnikovs WAS our employee till today's morning... :'( He had account on galastock as photographer... But after this incident he was fired! It's was of course my fault, as his chief ...

Well, at least he responded and admits his culpability. More than I can say about his interest in responding to his contributers. Methinks something more than firing is due Deniss Kolesnikovs, though. After all, he did violate copyright and is a thief.

« Reply #33 on: September 29, 2006, 06:56 »
0
Ohh... what a theatrical mea-culpa :'(

And so what ?
What about our stolen images ?
What about the rest of our submitted images ? Were they stolen too ?
What law suit are you going to take as a stock house owner after such a copyright infringement case ?

Do you really think you'll be done with just a 3 lines answer ?

Come on !

« Reply #34 on: September 29, 2006, 07:13 »
0
Ohh... what a theatrical mea-culpa  :'(

And so what ?
What about our stolen images ?
What about the rest of our submitted images ? Were they stolen too ?
What law suit are you going to take as a stock house owner after such a copyright infringement case ?

Do you really think you'll be done with just a 3 lines answer ?

Come on !

RIGHT! Absolutly agree! It's only beginning of the deal. This case must be delivered to the curthouse. A bit pitty that I didn't find my images on this loser "gallery", otherwise I would like to deal with him in the court. What an impertinence!!

dbvirago

« Reply #35 on: September 29, 2006, 07:43 »
0
Well, I checked the images he stole from me. The only place I have had these images downloaded from is ShutterStock. I have them other places, but they are new and have not received any downloads. Can others who have had their images stolen look to see where they have been downloaded from? I understand that this may be hard for some of the nicer images he stole. The 2 images he stole from me are not my best, so I understand that they don't get many downloads. This also leads me to believe that this is just some loser with no brain. I have much better images he could have stolen, at least I think so. I do not think this has something to do with GalaStock, but that is my 2 cents.

Except all of the images stolen, including yours, which have never been downloaded, are on Galastock. This is not coincidence. They may not be involved, but they are the source of the problem

« Reply #36 on: September 29, 2006, 07:45 »
0
In the least, there should be some action taken to ensure he has deleted all images.

« Reply #37 on: September 29, 2006, 07:54 »
0
Well, I checked the images he stole from me. The only place I have had these images downloaded from is ShutterStock. I have them other places, but they are new and have not received any downloads. Can others who have had their images stolen look to see where they have been downloaded from? I understand that this may be hard for some of the nicer images he stole. The 2 images he stole from me are not my best, so I understand that they don't get many downloads. This also leads me to believe that this is just some loser with no brain. I have much better images he could have stolen, at least I think so. I do not think this has something to do with GalaStock, but that is my 2 cents.


Hello, downloads doesn't matter. Galastock has access to all your images regardless if they were downloaded or not. You uploaded your images to them. The site is a scam, I could tell that in less than an hour's research and I warned about them before this even came up. I have over 2000 images on ShutterStock and not a single one turned up in this guys portfolio, ShutterStock is legit


Hello nruboc, please do not twist my words. I understand ShutterStock is legit, and I have never believed otherwise. Maybe you just misunderstood what I wrote. I simply stated that is the only place I have had the images downloaded from. This is not something new to stock photography, especially micro stock. Most of the time you find people download the images and then "go crazy" and decide to upload them as their own. In this case, it looks like an inside job.

Now you stated that you found GalaStock to be a scam. I did not find the same information, but then, I did not spend an hour researching this. Can you provide more information? I believed GalaStock was a valid stock house, but now I am not so sure. A 3 line response for such a major offense in this industry does not cut it. If you have more info, please share.

As for GalaStock, I would expect much, much more in response. As a photographer's agent, there are responsibilities. I would expect much more communication from GalaStock to the photographers that were a victim here. I would also expect to see legal actions taken by GalaStock. A quick response from GalaStock is in order. We will see what type of company GalaStock is based on this issue.

dbvirago

« Reply #38 on: September 29, 2006, 08:03 »
0
I did research it quite bit last night. All the images I found on his portfolio, including the one I PMd you about were on Galastock. Some of the images have never been downloaded or sold anywhere. And I agree, we need more from Galastock. Meanwhile, I have deleted all my images there.

Well, I checked the images he stole from me. The only place I have had these images downloaded from is ShutterStock. I have them other places, but they are new and have not received any downloads. Can others who have had their images stolen look to see where they have been downloaded from? I understand that this may be hard for some of the nicer images he stole. The 2 images he stole from me are not my best, so I understand that they don't get many downloads. This also leads me to believe that this is just some loser with no brain. I have much better images he could have stolen, at least I think so. I do not think this has something to do with GalaStock, but that is my 2 cents.


Hello, downloads doesn't matter. Galastock has access to all your images regardless if they were downloaded or not. You uploaded your images to them. The site is a scam, I could tell that in less than an hour's research and I warned about them before this even came up. I have over 2000 images on ShutterStock and not a single one turned up in this guys portfolio, ShutterStock is legit


Hello nruboc, please do not twist my words. I understand ShutterStock is legit, and I have never believed otherwise. Maybe you just misunderstood what I wrote. I simply stated that is the only place I have had the images downloaded from. This is not something new to stock photography, especially micro stock. Most of the time you find people download the images and then "go crazy" and decide to upload them as their own. In this case, it looks like an inside job.

Now you stated that you found GalaStock to be a scam. I did not find the same information, but then, I did not spend an hour researching this. Can you provide more information? I believed GalaStock was a valid stock house, but now I am not so sure. A 3 line response for such a major offense in this industry does not cut it. If you have more info, please share.

As for GalaStock, I would expect much, much more in response. As a photographer's agent, there are responsibilities. I would expect much more communication from GalaStock to the photographers that were a victim here. I would also expect to see legal actions taken by GalaStock. A quick response from GalaStock is in order. We will see what type of company GalaStock is based on this issue.

dbvirago

« Reply #39 on: September 29, 2006, 08:04 »
0
This is in a forum on the Fotolia site from an admin. I think they need to hear from all of us.

When a thief is reported we can't just shut them down. Even if 2-3 people are claiming copyright. While overwhelming evidence sometimes points towards somebody being a thief, we need to consider it carefully and try to contact the photographer. Otherwise it would be possible for a genuine photographer to have their potential income shut off by somebody with a grudge against them.

So we have to go through some processes first. We can freeze the account and stop any payments, but sometimes the portfolio is up while we contact the photographer accused.

For this reason it may appear that nothing has been done.

« Reply #40 on: September 29, 2006, 08:20 »
0
Quote
As for GalaStock, I would expect much, much more in response. As a photographer's agent, there are responsibilities. I would expect much more communication from GalaStock to the photographers that were a victim here. I would also expect to see legal actions taken by GalaStock. A quick response from GalaStock is in order. We will see what type of company GalaStock is based on this issue.
Quote

I've been somewhat dubious about GalaStock from the beginning, starting with the spam email soliciting my images. But because some photogs reported early sales I took the plunge and uploaded some trial images. All was going well with the first 22 of my 57 image upload being approved in a couple of days. But then the long wait began for the rest of the images to be reviewed. Also, there were some holdout skeptics who wondered if early sales could possibly be scam sales just to promote more uploads. In noodling around the site one day I noticed that I had a 5 image upload limit per day. What? Five uploads per day was ludicrous. After waiting 2 weeks for my remaining 35 images to be reviewed, I emailed GalaStock regarding the lengthy queue time and the teeny upload limit. Never heard back from them.

Now, we get a 3 line, lame apology from the owner for this egregious violation of our trust. I think, but can't prove, that there is more to this than he has admitted to. I do think the site is a scam--if not outright by intention, then surely by lack of oversight and the dissing of the contributers demonstrated by my own experience with them.

Pat

dbvirago

« Reply #41 on: September 29, 2006, 09:08 »
0
Well said, Pat. And I started out exactly the same, including skepticisim, but without the sales. I only uploaded 12 shots to see what would happen.

« Reply #42 on: September 29, 2006, 09:36 »
0
Well, I have not heard anything from GalaStock.  Looks like Fotolia may take some action.  I am removing the 200 or so images i have on GalaStock.  Not that this will matter if the site is not for real.

« Reply #43 on: September 29, 2006, 09:46 »
0
I wonder if this guy submitted to other sites besides Fotolia?
I tried Googling him but only found him on Fotolia.

« Reply #44 on: September 29, 2006, 09:48 »
0
Every image stock site has the people which have an access to the photos originals. This people staff of the photobank , trusted staff. We made mistake with Deniss Kolesnikovs he betrays our trust.
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!

« Reply #45 on: September 29, 2006, 09:56 »
0
Is any action being taken against Deniss Kolesnikovs?

« Reply #46 on: September 29, 2006, 10:06 »
0
And I would like to assure you that such awful situation is not possible for us in future!

Sooo reassuring...
As far as I'm concerned, my future with GS is already history
440 mouse clicks = 220 images deleted

So long, GS

Greg Boiarsky

« Reply #47 on: September 29, 2006, 10:13 »
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!

« Reply #48 on: September 29, 2006, 10:18 »
0

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!
Well, it won't happen for you in the future if your site goes under.

I'm one who had an image 'lifted' that had absolutely no sales.  (that tells you something about the thief's poor judgment.  If he had only taken images with sales on other sites, it might have been a little more illusive.)

But anyway.  I haven't yet removed my approved images from your site, just the pending images.  I would like a better response to this than I have had so far.  I will soon be removing all images and will join others in spreading the word if I'm not satisfied soon.

« Reply #49 on: September 29, 2006, 10:22 »
0
Every image stock site has the people which have an access to the photos originals. This people staff of the photobank , trusted staff. We made mistake with Deniss Kolesnikovs he betrays our trust.
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!


Do you ever respond to your emails? I've tried contacting you, but got no respond. This surely is not a good thing. I'm removing all my images as well.

« 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
8424 Views
Last post May 27, 2009, 03:25
by MichaelJay
13 Replies
3138 Views
Last post November 10, 2011, 05:54
by Microbius
5 Replies
1754 Views
Last post January 07, 2012, 03:58
by RacePhoto
26 Replies
3146 Views
Last post June 07, 2012, 10:10
by bunhill
16 Replies
1762 Views
Last post October 28, 2016, 14:26
by Luka

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors