Adobe Stock/Fotolia avoids responsibility for illegal sales of 856 cuts of Boians 3D content.

Hello! I’m Boians Cho Joo Young.

The official answer to the illegal sale of the copyright property of 856 cuts of Boians 3D content of Fotolia have come in 14 days . Since Fotolia is a foreign company that has entered Korea , I sent a protest about Korean. Boians have been providing content with Fotolia for the past six years . It is currently in the state of withdrawal.

Adobe Stock / Fotolia’s official position is sighing. The heart of this case is that Adobe Stock / Fotolia sold Boians 856 Cuts of copyrighted material without permission. I have not received an apology, nor have I been promised financial damages.

Adobe Stock / Fotolia is currently generating revenue from selling copyrighted products, A company that is responsible for the protection and management of copyright works. If you sell unauthorized use of authorship rights of others, and you are not responsible for apologies and damages, on what basis will your company sell the images to customers?

(Fotolia Korea Official answer. May 17, 2017. 14:50)

안녕하세요.

우선, 작가님의 저작권을 침해한것으로 말씀하신 Pavaluca 판매자에 대한 콘텐츠는 더이상 판매되지 않도록 조취되었음을 알려드립니다.

더불어, 작가님께서 Fotolia 에서 판매하셨던 콘텐츠들은 Fotolia 에서만 독점적으로 판매하였던것이 아니었던 것으로 확인되며, 다른 경로를 통하여 콘텐츠가 도용되었을 수 있습니다. 작가님의 콘텐츠가 Fotolia 를 통하여 유출되었다고 볼 수 있는 근거가 없으며, 당사의 해당 콘텐츠 도용에 대한 책임이 없습니다.

감사합니다.

Adobe Stock/Fotolia 팀 드림.

 
(Translate Korean into English)

Good morning.

First of all, I want to let you know that the content for the Pavaluca sellers that you mentioned infringing on your copyright is no longer sold.

In addition, the content that you have sold on Fotolia has not been sold exclusively on Fotolia, and your content may have been compromised through other channels. There is no reason to believe that your content has been leaked through Fotolia, and we are not responsible for theft of that content.

Thank you.

Adobe Stock / Fotolia Team Dream.

 
(Contents of case in time)

1. Pavaluca uploaded an illegal copy of Boians 3D content 856 cuts from fotolia.com, stock.adobe.com

2. Adobe Stock / Fotolia has sold Boians content without permission.

3. Adobe Stock / Fotolia is a foreign company that sells in Korea. Boians damage content Total price: KRW 25,680,000 (VAT not included), CD 22 pieces Contents Total price: KRW 4,600,000 won (VAT not included)

4. Despite the unauthorized sale of Adobe Stock / Fotolia, Boians was not monopolistic in the past and has avoided content liability because it may have been leaked by other means. The essence of the matter is the unauthorized sale of the two companies without permission.

5. Adobe Stock / Fotolia deletes Pavaluca’s account and is not legally liable.
https://pl.fotolia.com/p/206732155, https://stock.adobe.com/search?creator_id=206732155

6. Adobe Stock / Fotolia has not officially apologized to Boians.

7. Adobe Stock / Fotolia did not provide Boians with any information about a person named Pavaluca.

8. Adobe Stock / Fotolia did not disclose the sale of Pavaluca to Boians.

9. Adobe Stock / Fotolia has not promised Boians any financial compensation for damages.

You've lost me.

Good luck recovering that money. The agencies love it because they get to keep it ALL!

Quote from: cathyslife on May 17, 2017, 12:21

Fotolia is owned by Adobe. Adobe was founded in Silicon valley and I believe their headquarters are still there. So I am not sure why the OP is saying they are a foreign company. I am sure they sell worldwide, tho.

So that's a foreign company to me and to someone who lives in Korea, and indeed, most of the world's population. The fact that they sell internationally is irrelevant to that.

However, I agree with Sean and Angela: I've never heard of pay-outs for image theft from any micro.
You might have a good legal case to be paid, but it would cost you a lot more to hire an international lawyer (meaning "a lawyer qualified in International Law"), or indeed a USian lawyer, than you'd be likely to get.

oops my bad

Quote from: cathyslife on May 17, 2017, 12:21

Fotolia is owned by Adobe. Adobe was founded in Silicon valley and I believe their headquarters are still there. So I am not sure why the OP is saying they are a foreign company. I am sure they sell worldwide, tho.

So that's a foreign company to me and to someone who lives in Korea, and indeed, most of the world's population. The fact that they sell internationally is irrelevant to that.

However, I agree with Sean, Angela and you: I've never heard of pay-outs for image theft from any micro.
You might have a good legal case to be paid, but it would cost you a lot more to hire an international lawyer (meaning "a lawyer qualified in International Law"), or indeed a USian lawyer, than you'd be likely to get.

International lawyers are often used to refer to lawyers who are responsible for international affairs, but they are not strictly international lawyers.

[Attorney qualification]
1. By Country: The method used throughout the country with the attorney's license.
  Ex) Korea, United Kingdom, Japan,

2. State and Commonwealth: In the United States, each state is licensed.

3. There is no qualification as an 'international' lawyer because the law varies from country to country. "It is a good idea to mark a lawyer qualified in a particular country, such as" American lawyer "or" Japanese lawyer. "

4. In the case of Fotolia, we have a Korean Business Division and we are doing sales and advertising consultation with Korean employees in Korea. In this case, I think it is reasonable to see the lawsuits in Korea.

국제변호사는 주로 국제적인 업무를 담당하는 변호사를 지칭하는 용어로 사용되나, 엄밀하게 국제변호사란 자격은 없습니다. 변호사 자격은 국가(대한민국, 영국)별, 또는 주별(미국)로 주어지기 때문입니다.

나라마다 법이 다르기 때문에 '국제' 변호사라는 자격은 있을 수 없습니다. '미국변호사', '일본변호사'처럼 특정 국가에서 자격을 딴 변호사라고 표기해야 맞습니다.

포토리아의 경우에는 한국 사업부가 있으며, 한국인 직원과 한국에서 판매 및 광고 상담등의 업무를 하고 있습니다. 이 경우 소송 주체국을 한국으로 보는 것이 타당하다 생각 합니다.

By international lawyer I meant a lawyer with knowledge of the Law in the relevant country/ies.
If you feel you have a strong legal case, by all means, go ahead. Sadly, the way these things are weighted against us, you might get a moral victory but unlikely a financial one.
If you feel you have enough legal knowledge to sue without a lawyer, all power to your elbow ( which means, "I wish you well").
Not wishing to be nasty,  (I'm hopeless at languages), but if at some stage you have to deal with US Law, I don't think your English is up to it. Laws are deliberately written so that even native speakers can't be certain of the interpretation.

It's a shame agencies (Adobe/Fotolia being one of them) don't properly compensate for the damages. Adobe/Fotolia approved the content, which means they should have checked the copyright authenticity of the uploaded images. In reality this is difficult with an ever-expanding collection, but they should at least support the infringed artists and compensate them the best they can. Such as giving the infringed artist all necessary information so that they can take legal action against the uploader, or a clawback of the revenue and passing it on to the infringed artist. Refusing to apologize and pretending it's not their responsibility is just arrogant corporate behavior.

I wish you the best in dealing with this frustrating mess.

Quote from: angelawaye on May 17, 2017, 12:23

Good luck recovering that money. The agencies love it because they get to keep it ALL!

Out of curiosity, how do they handle these things? Shouldn't they technically refund the purchases, since they are invalid licenses?

I thought that. Surely they legally have to contact the buyer and let them know their license is invalid and issue a refund.

I suppose you can't refund a subscription download though.

Until there is a big screwup ending with a buyer with deep pockets - deep enough to pay for fancy lawyers - suing an agency rather then settling things over email, there will be no change. Most likely  the change, if it ever happens, will lead to more IP scrutiny, potentially at contributors' expense. Generally, I don't think an occasional petty thief will leave a sizable dent in a solid commercial portfolio, so I don't worry my pretty little head about those silly things.