I ran across this blog post about some site that was using istock watermarked thumbs and got a take down notice from Getty.

Reading the comments section gives you an idea how some of these thieves think, its their right, its fair use and so on.

Here is the link if you care to have a look........if you do it will probably piss you off, like it did me.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100202/0325448009.shtml#comments

-Don

I agree with click_click. It seems pretty minor in the offense category. There seems to be bigger fish to fry than some guy's blog making fun of crappy images. If there are real pirates out there, why are you busting the guy working at Long John Silver's?

Problem is that the micro market is largely based on pricing images in a way that makes it possible for bloggers etc. to pay to use them. If we start saying it's okay for the little guy to steal our work (even when they can buy it at super low prices) the model starts to collapse and we're left without a job.

Yeah, I think it is a bit of a gray area. 

Here is the site they are talking about
http://awkwardstockphotos.com/

Dreamstime, Crestock and Fotolia even provide links to hotlink back to them.  I have been a little confused as to when it is and isn't OK to use this hot link, but I do know that Crestock for sure gives you permission to use the image for free in a blog post if you use the hot link code.

Using a watermarked image for a blog makes it look unprofessional. I doubt that highly successful bloggers would actually use watermarked image on a regular basis. If a small group of bloggers that doesn't have the money for even the smallest sizes (they still have to buy credit packs...) then I'd rather see them use my image with a watermark and a straight link to the agency.

After all, I'm not complaining about all the people looking at my watermarked image at an agency NOT buying it...

That's because those people aren't USING it to their gain.

I don't see any ads whatsoever that could remotely generate any monetary benefit for this site owner unless the site becomes so incredibly famous that he would be featured on CNN for his outstanding work...

I guess the Tumblr referral link is what you are referring to?

Other than that, this site is a dud. Who cares?

I started the thread about the printing company in Indiana that is using images from National Geographic photographers as well as other Macro and Micro shooters. That guy never bought one license and is selling tons of products with the images on them.

That is a problem, not some watermarked, agency-linked and "awkward" images.

Quote from: sjlocke on March 17, 2010, 08:24

That's because those people aren't USING it to their gain.

I don't see any ads whatsoever that could remotely generate any monetary benefit for this site owner unless the site becomes so incredibly famous that he would be featured on CNN for his outstanding work...

His gain, monetary, ego, hobby or otherwise.

It's simple. He doesn't own those images, the contributor does.
He has no right to use them without the contributor's permission.
There's a general feeling that a lot of people have that they are entitled to stuff just because they wan't to use it.
I think it has something to do with the feeling that everyone's opinion is equally valid on all things, the internet is partly responsible for that, as well as the general dumbing down of all media. "I think I should have it so who's to say I'm wrong?"
What matters is the law not what some ill-informed blogger thinks. I'll side with Getty's lawyers on this one.

Bloggers definitely do buy micro images, if I do a Google search of my name I get many blogs coming up with my images legitimately used and copyright acknowledged.
If they can't afford it that's fine, they shouldn't use stock images then. I don't object to bloggers not using images they don't own.
If a blogger does make cash from ads etc. or if a hobbyist wants to spend a couple of dollars sprucing up their blog they can pay and use stock images.
Shimples

...
I wrote her weeks ago explaining she could not do this.  I even said "As a serious bunisesswoman, I am sure you will act correctly, respecting my intellectual property rights."  Now, writing to DT will only make her remove the image, without any compensation for her insistence on doing something illegal.

We need to find ways of punishing such people. ...

WHOIS info

Administrative Contact , Technical Contact :      
      Karasma, L.L.C
      [email protected]
      15 West 120th Street
      #5
      New York, NY 10027
      US
      Phone: 917-865-5410
     
      Record expires on 19-Mar-2012    
      Record created on 19-Mar-2007
      Database last updated on 19-Mar-2007
 
      Domain servers in listed order:    Manage DNS
 
      NS11.IXWEBHOSTING.COM         
      NS12.IXWEBHOSTING.COM         
     
        Show underlying registry data for this record
     

Current Registrar:    NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
IP Address:    76.163.243.147 (ARIN & RIPE IP search)
IP Location:    US(UNITED STATES)-KENTUCKY-HOPKINSVILLE
Record Type:    Domain Name
Server Type:    Apache 1
Lock Status:    clientTransferProhibited
WebSite Status:    Active
DMOZ    no listings
Y! Directory:    see listings
Secure:    No
Ecommerce:    No
Traffic Ranking:    Not available
Data as of:    22-Apr-2008

This is the web host who you should contact:

IXWEBHOSTING.COM

from their Terms of Service:

...
D. Intellectual Property Provisions

Subscribers of IX Web Hosting's services are prohibited from storing or posting content or links to content that infringe, or otherwise violate the intellectual property rights of third parties (e.g. trademark, patent or copyright infringements).
...

Your best bet is to contact the 24/7 live support online and ask for the email address where you have to send you DMCA claim.

Send that email to Erin ([email protected]) on CC as well so she can forward it to DT's legal department.

If you can' afford a lawyer that's all you can do I'm afraid.

That lady knows that you couldn't sue her for a lot of money - that's why she is doing it. Seen it happening too many times.

Good luck!

click_click,

Yes, I can contact their host and DT, but in the end she will simply remove the image.  No punishment, life goes on.  And she works for the legal market!  What type of consultant is she?  I could accept she not knowing this was illegal, but after I emailed her saying it wasn't legal, offering her a chance to buy it or contact Dreamstime for clarification, she simply ignored this and kept using it - this is absurd!

I know that this is incredibly infuriating "although" we're talking about a watermarked thumbnail but I truly understand how you feel. It's not right.

I had issues before and did find lawyers who were willing to help me on a contingency basis. It might take you 10 or 20 phone calls but it could be worth a try.

Usually the lawyer would write a nasty letter threatening with a lawsuit, offering a settlement which really makes sense. But some thieves are going to try to hard ball it and wait and see because litigation is very costly for a lawyer (his time) and they want to avoid that when working on contingency. If you'd pay them of course they'd be happy to go to court.

Furthermore the lawyer will take into consideration what amount of damages are estimated. That would determine the settlement amount. I guess we're not talking about tens of thousands of $ of damages. Licensing fee for the lady would have been 2$ or 3$ and what are your damages? You better have registered copyright on that image. That might help the lawyer to gain some leverage (that's what I've been told... - I'm NOT a lawyer!!!).

Sorry, I wish I could do more. I've seen this happening so many times it doesn't even bother me anymore (as sad as it sounds). Another long time contributor whose images were ripped as well by the Indiana printing company just wanted to have his images removed. He wasn't interested in damages because he knows there is nothing to get - or at least not enough to make it worth while. It is sad indeed. But cyber-criminals do have a relatively easy life online.

Best of luck!

Hello Madelaide --

First, I must profusely apologize for the understandable upset my non-response has caused you.

No excuses are viable, yet and still, I receive well over 400 e-mails per day, so a telephone number either in the e-mail you sent me or in your listing here could have saved you much anxiety.  Unfortunately though, until you posted the link back to this site, this issue was not a the forefront.

Your thumbnail image has been removed from my site and I wish you all the best, 

Kara

Mad

First, allow me to apologize for the any anxiety I may have caused you.

Excuses aside, I receive more than 400 e-mails per day, so until you posted a link to this platform on my blog, your concerns were not bought to the forefront.  I could have contacted you right away if there was a telephone number in your profile here or in the e-mail you sent me.

Your thumbnail image has been removed from and I wish you all the best,
Kara Smith
Karasma Media PR

So are you going to compensate Madelaide for the theft and use of her image?

After following up with a copyright attorney, since the image has been removed and I do not receive monetary gain from the platform.  I have no legal obligation to do so. 

However, I realize that uncompensated use of images online is a serious and unfair practice as evidenced from the content here.   So, I am willing to negotiate a small payment if Madelade calls me directly at 917-856-5410.

Thank you for following up,
Kara

 

Thank you Adelaide.  I've received your e-mail and will respond shortly.

All the best,
Kara

Thanks so much FD amateur --

I appreciate your suggestion and it's an excellent idea - I am reviewing Dreamstime now.

A bit of background about me...

After an extended illness, my God-brother passed away in the the beginning of February, my God-mother/best friend/confidant died two weeks later and her funeral was February 19th.  (I posted about this on 2/15)
Madeline sent her original e-mail to me on February 20th... 

I'm very careful not to use images protected by copyright, so I feel it's important to put all of this into the proper perspective.  I also hope it will help guide the tone/attitude taken when communicating going forward.    Actions are not always done out of conscience maliciousness.

Madeline and I are communicating offline.  Her thumbnail image has been removed from my site, and I have made her a fair offer for it's use.

I truly appreciate you taking time to look-through my site and would like to include it in a blog post I'm writing about being "called-out" for unauthorized image use.  There are a multitude of artists and photographers who have gone similar challenges,  so this is information audience will surely appreciate.

All the best,
Kara

Quote from: karasma on March 18, 2010, 12:45

Thank you for following up

I had a quick look at your site and it has some real informational value. Good images can enhance the appeal and attractiveness of your site. Why don't you just buy some images in the future? On Dreamstime for instance, you can already license more than half screen wide images for 1$ with a very modest credit package. The bad publicity for you and all the email hassles aren't just worth the ridiculous low prices stock images cost these days.

Hi cclapper --

While I do not recall the specifics, it's more than likely in my haste to publish that I accessed the image via Google Images, and never actually accessed the original website; which I certainly know better than to do.  Actually, did not complete my registration at Dreamstime Stock Photography because I stopped to respond to this message...

Unfortutnately, your "guess" is incorrect.  Madeline posted a comment on my blog (which only I see prior to my approving BTW) and I responded immediately.

Quote

Actions are not always done out of conscience maliciousness.

No they are not. But if you went to the DT site, and if you grabbed the image and posted it on your site, you must have realized that the images on DT were for sale, not for free, no?

It is good that you have come forward and are willing to make an attempt at making things right. That is way more than most people who steal images do. But you are only responding because you have been outed in public. If Madelaide would have kept it to herself, I'm guessing you would have done nothing.

Since weeks went by without madelaide hearing back from you, you wouldn't have given it a second thought. The real test is whether you do the right thing, even when no one is looking.

Unfortutnately, your "guess" is incorrect.  Madeline posted a comment on my blog (which only I see prior to my approving BTW) and I responded immediately.

Just a correction: I never posted a comment in your blog - maybe someone else did, as we all support each other on these matters.  Have in mind that to some people the image stock business is their sole or main income source, so any such event of copyright infraction is a very serious subject, and that's why I never swallowed having the infractor merely removing/replacing the image, especially at professional/commercial/editorial sites that should know about intellectual property.

I did send you an email on February 20th. I understand you may have missed it - I also get a lot of spam mail - but I supposed a subject "Unauthorized use of image‏" would have caught anyone's attention.

I have just sent you an invoice for the amount you proposed.  I would like to add, however, a comment about your sentence "I replaced your image with are free of  charge or .20 to .30".  Regarding the free images, be sure they are free images, acquired from sources that specifically say those are free images.  I can put an image I purchased in a website without any copyright notice in it, and it is still owned by someone else who licensed it to me, so it can not be used or even hotlinked without proper authorization.  And regarding the 20-30c images, these are possibly prices for volume sales in subscriptions, but yes, images can cost very little.

I'm glad you have signed up to Dreamstime, it's an excellent site with works by many talented people, and I'm sure you will be able to enhance the products you offer with the quality images you will be able to acquire.

Regards,
Adelaide