MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Are your images for sale on eBay?  (Read 6415 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 16, 2009, 02:49 »
0
Hey all,

Yesterday, David Hobby twittered about the criminal sales of 3000 stock photographs over ebay on DVD, sourced from Micro with the most recognisable images coming from Yuri Arcurs. The DVD was being sold for $US4.99 or thereabouts, and this is in direct contradiction to the allowed usage of microstock images. Ebay has now removed that posting and is hopefully tying up any loose ends there.

However, I went on to ebay and did a quick search for 'stock images' and this came up: http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/digienlight

Not to start a witch hunt, but this seems ridiculously cheap, and why sell them on eBay??


« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2009, 09:10 »
0
Hey all,

Yesterday, David Hobby twittered about the criminal sales of 3000 stock photographs over ebay on DVD, sourced from Micro with the most recognisable images coming from Yuri Arcurs. The DVD was being sold for $US4.99 or thereabouts, and this is in direct contradiction to the allowed usage of microstock images. Ebay has now removed that posting and is hopefully tying up any loose ends there.

However, I went on to ebay and did a quick search for 'stock images' and this came up: http://shop.ebay.com/merchant/digienlight

Not to start a witch hunt, but this seems ridiculously cheap, and why sell them on eBay??



Did you notice where the DVDs are shipped from? Malaysia Are copyrite laws enforced there?

Here is a "What if"

"What if" you or I was to compile 1000's of photos from the sites that we are now selling to, that is, just get the free ones and buy nothing. Put all the free ones on DVDs and sell them as a copyrighted "compilation" ... you got them free, anyone can burn a DVD and you can buy blank DVD's for pennies. Where would you sell them?

Think about it!

STOP GIVING AWAY FREE IMAGES TO ANY SITE!!!!   IT HURTS US ALL!!!

-Larry
« Last Edit: September 16, 2009, 09:13 by Lcjtripod »

« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2009, 14:21 »
0
ebay should be awared about this

lisafx

« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 14:29 »
0

STOP GIVING AWAY FREE IMAGES TO ANY SITE!!!!   IT HURTS US ALL!!!


Free images, however we may feel about them, are not the issue here. 

These disks, if they contain microstock images, are in violation of the terms of allowable uses on all the major micros.  Even the free collections on the micros are subject to the license agreements. 

« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 14:34 »
0

STOP GIVING AWAY FREE IMAGES TO ANY SITE!!!!   IT HURTS US ALL!!!


Free images, however we may feel about them, are not the issue here.  

These disks, if they contain microstock images, are in violation of the terms of allowable uses on all the major micros.  Even the free collections on the micros are subject to the license agreements.  

You are 100% correct. .... But, thieves do not obey laws. If it is easy to steel them, they will.

-Larry
« Last Edit: September 16, 2009, 14:36 by Lcjtripod »

lisafx

« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 14:39 »
0
.... But, thieves do not obey laws. If it is easy to steel them, they will.


Yeah, you definitely have a point there. 

I have some free ones out there.  I donated free images at 123RF for awhile thinking it would get me free publicity and more sales, but to be honest my sales are better since I STOPPED donating.  Go figure ???

Would hate to think that any of mine, free or otherwise, would end up on these disks. 


« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2009, 17:17 »
0
It does look like outright theft to me. No way that seller obtained those dozens of collections legally. Just my take on it from scanning those offerings. I hope ebay investigates.

« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2009, 17:38 »
0
Someone posted this one in the SS forums as well.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190319266717

Grrr, these are such a nuisance!

« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 17:47 »
0
It does look like outright theft to me. No way that seller obtained those dozens of collections legally. Just my take on it from scanning those offerings. I hope ebay investigates.

I have been an ebay member for ten years and I do know that ebay investagates and removes illegal, stolen, pirated items etc., ONLY when the OWNER or Law Enforcement request an item be removed. I reported dozens in the past with no results. When I was able to contact the OWNER of the item and they told ebay to remove the item, ebay then did so.

-Larry

lisafx

« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2009, 16:50 »
0

I have been an ebay member for ten years and I do know that ebay investagates and removes illegal, stolen, pirated items etc., ONLY when the OWNER or Law Enforcement request an item be removed. I reported dozens in the past with no results. When I was able to contact the OWNER of the item and they told ebay to remove the item, ebay then did so.

-Larry

Lovely.   

Without buying these "collections" most of us copyright owners have no way of knowing if our images are there.

No wonder ebay has such a shady reputation :(

« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2009, 17:02 »
0
It's like when I reported watermarked images of mine to Flickr (I think, it may have been MySpace) with links to stock sites to prove my rights over the image, and they replied (an automated reply, perhaps) asking me the same information.

« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2009, 18:59 »
0
I don't have a shady opinion of ebay at all. I've sold and bought thousands of dollars of items there with no problems. It's the lawbreakers who earn my disgust. Ebay does have a duty to do what they can to stop illegal stuff and they do but the sheer volume of suspected theft, fencing, illegal products, etc. makes it an unending task.

I'm amazed that the level of illegal use of images isn't more widespread and overt. Digital images are great "genie out of the bottle" examples. And a risk we've got to accept to continue in this business.

« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2009, 11:45 »
0
 Theft is worked into the cost of most production of goods by manufacturers and resellers. Our business is really no different. Some people steal. Hard number to get a line on but if you were to guess and say 2% of your images were going to be stolen in their life you can start to add that figure into the cost of your production.

Best,
Jonathan

Dook

« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2009, 13:40 »
0
Jonathan, that sounds like theft support to me. Is there any other way to fight it?

« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2009, 16:51 »
0
Jonathan, that sounds like theft support to me. Is there any other way to fight it?

Jonathon's right. Unfortunately it is simply part of the costs of doing business. It's more cost-effective to accept (begrudgingly) a small amount of 'shrinkage' than expending huge resources trying to eliminate it __ which is virtually impossible anyway.

« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2009, 12:53 »
0
I think the only way to really try to prevent this is to keep each other informed through forums like this.  I wonder if some of these people selling other photographer's images think they are buying the copyright.  It would be cool if  the microstock sites would have a box pop up to new buyers when they purchase an image restating the copyright law and the consequences.

« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2009, 13:07 »
0
Theft is indeed a legitimate cost of doing business and should be factored in as such. Here's how theft is found at the retail level. From a 2009 study:

BOCA RATON, Fla., June 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Retail theft, including shoplifting,
employee theft, administrative error and vendor fraud, is up, according to a
recent annual survey conducted by the University of Florida with a funding
grant from ADT Security Services.  The National Retail Security Survey (NRSS)
preliminary results show a real increase in the rate of retail theft for the
first time in six years.  In 2007, the lowest rate of retail theft in the
18-year history of the survey was reported at a rate of 1.44 percent of
overall retail sales. Last year that rate rose to 1.52 percent of sales
translating into losses of $36.5 billion.


I would use a 1-2% factor of image theft if I were into such calculations. Maybe a bit more since there is little fear of getting caught and punished. On the other hand there is a smaller market for stolen images in that there is no ready market to resell the items or to return them to a store for a non-receipt cash refund or store credit (ala drug-related thefts).

I'm not going to lose sleep over this issue. But I agree it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth when seeing such obvious theft of images.


« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2009, 13:11 »
0
Someone posted this one in the SS forums as well.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190319266717

Grrr, these are such a nuisance!


It seems ebay has removed this product . . . so maybe there is hope.

alias

« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2009, 14:22 »
0
1. I'm going to guess that most piracy is the result of cheap subscription sales.

2. As with the music industry, piracy also probably ultimately generates sales. The use of stock images in general, even pirated, leads to a bigger market for stock images in general.

3. When agencies and photographers give away free images: Far from encouraging piracy this very likely draws people into the idea of using legitimate agencies.

4. It may take a while to be implemented but there is no reason why every image sold could not be uniquely encoded - each image therefore traceable back to a unique account and name. And not in the metadata.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
4482 Views
Last post February 28, 2008, 23:43
by graficallyminded
11 Replies
14568 Views
Last post October 20, 2008, 17:40
by hrhportia
15 Replies
3663 Views
Last post May 22, 2013, 17:23
by cascoly
1 Replies
1113 Views
Last post January 20, 2019, 12:27
by Newsfocus1
2 Replies
655 Views
Last post April 11, 2019, 09:47
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results