Huh, surprised no one is concerned by this...

Huh, surprised no one is concerned by this...

If I am understanding correctly, this is only if your images are used in a blog, rather than all your images displaying large with no watermarks, right? 

I would be concerned if my images were affected.  I would probably write DP and ask that my images be removed from the blog or else resized or watermarked. 

I think the reason you aren't getting any responses is because it isn't directly affecting anyone.  There is so much else going on on other sites that DOES affect the majority of us, that something that doesn't isn't going to get too much play.  How much outrage are we supposed to be able to muster, after all?

I read the blog spot wrong, just realized it's not someone that purchased the photos to repost but the selling site.  Wow yes, I think they should at very least use a program for photo displays that does not allow a right click download.  Unless these are the weekly free photos they center their blog post around then they should have downloading them disabled.  I understand wanting to make the blog post look good but they didn't actually pay for the use of the photos themselves from the photographer and they are on a site where everyone that lands on it by chance or because they meant to, is likely looking for photos for something.  That's different then someone posting them on their new site in articles where they could be taken from but it won't be attracting people that are looking for photos.

If I find my images on Shutterstock's facebook photos, I'm sending Facebook a DMCA 

Quote from: Microstock Man on December 18, 2012, 18:15

Huh, surprised no one is concerned by this...

If I contributed to DepositPhotos (I don't) and lived in New Zealand (nope) I might be. This is hardly a blog at all - they just show a bunch of photos.

On top of which the copyright  line is backwards - � Depositphotos | photographer. Dreamstime, for example, helpfully gives the form "� Jo Ann Snover | Dreamstime.com" with every image. Deposit Photos does not hold the copyright to the image.

If they actually bothered to write something, perhaps it might interest a buyer; if anyone sees their own images in their blog, I'd suggest asking to have it taken down. If enough people do that, perhaps they'll get the hint. If you know any of the photographers, get in touch with them to see if they mind.

You just hit one of my big thorns. Sites that use our images and fail to properly display the Copyright or in many cases any Copyright. But the one that continues to aggravate me is "� Sitename" No artist name at all. Plus the issue of wiping all metadata from our images.

First they get the images for almost nothing, then they use them without attribution. "Ya load sixteen tons..."

I was featured on their blog, but with link to the image, and correct copyright credit. 0 sales generated tho.

not surprised.. why should they buy it if there is a free version available in the blog section..

Although I'm just a vector contributor, I find it shocking that this is what happens with contributor's photo's. So I emailed them that they should watermark or reduce the size of these images, and change the copyright notice to:
"� Contributor name | Depositphotos"

Well, I received a reply, which IMO is completely irrelevant to my question.

"Dear Noedelhap,
 
We do appreciate your concern.
 
However, according to Depositphotos' SUPPLY AGREEMENT
http://submit.depositphotos.com/supply-agreement.html, paragraph 6:
 
Depositphotos reserves the right to use the files as part of its own
activities or activities of third parties related to the issuance of
licenses for the Files, promotional purposes, marketing and advertising.
Contributor agrees that he/she will not be paid commissions on the use
of his/her files for such purposes.
 
Thus, we do have the right to use our contributors' files without
watermarks on our blog, and this information is publicly available.
As a contributor, you agreed with these terms when you accepted the
Membership Agreement. Please see the abstract below:
 
http://submit.depositphotos.com/member-agreement.html
BY ACCEPTING THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE USER ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES
THAT HE HAS READ AND UNDERSTOOD ALL OTHER RELATED AGREEMENTS LISTED
BELOW, WHICH CAN BE FOUND ON THE WEBSITE, AND ACCEPTS ALL THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF SAID AGREEMENTS:
Terms of Use;
Privacy Policy;
DMCA Copyright Infringement Notice;
License Agreement;
Standard License Agreement;
Extended License Agreement;
Comparison of the License Capabilities;
Supply Agreement;
Affiliate Agreement;
Subscription Agreement;
API Program Agreement;
Cancellation Policy;
Model Release (PDF);
Property Release (PDF).
 
Please feel free to contact us if you have any further questions.
 
Best regards,
The Depositphotos Team"


But I never said they couldn't use them, I simply asked if they could protect these images from being downloaded for free. Also, they don't mention my question regarding copyright notation.

I got a follow-up email from them:

"Dear Noedelhap,
 
In addition to the previous email, let us clarify the copyright issue.
According to the Standard License Agreement
(http://depositphotos.com/standard-license.html), paragraph 5:
 
User agrees to display a copyright notice on or immediately next to
each file licensed pursuant to a Standard license that is reproduced in
mass media (such as printed magazines and newspapers), such notice must
contain the following text ��Depositphotos/Name of Contributor�.
 
This is what we do with the pictures in our blog posts.
 
In any case, thank you again for expressing your point; we'll take it
into account planning our blog content for the next year.
 
Best regards,
The Depositphotos Team"