pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Getty added to EU Google antitrust investigation  (Read 2684 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stock-will-eat-itself

« on: June 23, 2015, 06:47 »
+7
"It also claims that Google Images display of photos from sites and publishers, instead of original licensed content, is bad for consumers."

Fingers crossed.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/23/getty-eu-google-antitrust-investigation


« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2015, 14:38 »
+2
Would be a real game changer to see this suit succeed!

Shelma1

« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2015, 11:22 »
+1
An alternate opinion, which blames Getty itself for poor SEO and complicated purchasing:

http://www.thesempost.com/getty-images-blames-google-not-competitors/

Uncle Pete

« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2015, 11:45 »
+1
Google is accused of distorting search results in favor of its own services. That's what the investigation is about.

Ever use Bing? I'm happy with the results and it gets me out of the Google control. But of course when I search for an image the first page of results has Bing's image search results one of the top three.

« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2015, 11:48 »
+5
An alternate opinion, which blames Getty itself for poor SEO and complicated purchasing:

http://www.thesempost.com/getty-images-blames-google-not-competitors/


Lovely :)

It isn't entirely fair in that the purchase example is an RM image - it would have easier (and more comparable to their competitors) if they picked an RF image. But the overall points are valid.

Getty's biggest problem is its private equity ownership and its own greedy+inept management of a once segment leading business.

« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2015, 12:03 »
+2
http://press.gettyimages.com/getty-images-granted-interested-party-status-in-eus-investigation-into-anticompetitive-behavior-by-google/
These are the allegations:
"Google also engages in web scraping, a technique which facilitates the extraction and duplication of data, including images, which in a great many instances involves the outright duplication of copyrighted material. Google uses photographs and images that are owned and/or distributed by Getty Images in Google Images search results, with these results often appearing as a carousel at the top or near the top of the general web search results page. Clicking on images in the carousel does not lead users to source sites instead they direct users to Google Images, where users can view large format, often unattributed images.  Web search results that link directly to the Getty Images website are placed low in the search results, frequently, and remarkably, not on the first page of results. This means Google is benefitting from the use of Getty Images content, used to generate results within Google Image Search, without sending the image searchers to the Getty Images website or other competing image search engines. Furthermore, with its large-format display, it allows end users to easily copy the images by simply right-clicking on them, resulting in massive theft of original content."

« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2015, 12:16 »
0
It would be good if some of these articles linked sources.  It's one thing to search for "coffee shop stock photos" and another to search for "coffee shop" stock photos, obviously you'll get better results that are more likely to have the original source if you include "stock photo" in your search, the complaint seems to be more about searches for "coffee shop" which is more likely to have a large unwatermarked nonoriginal source at the top of the results.

« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2015, 13:20 »
+3
"Google also engages in web scraping, a technique which facilitates the extraction and duplication of data, including images, which in a great many instances involves the outright duplication of copyrighted material."

A practice that they penalize regular website owners for doing.

« Reply #8 on: June 25, 2015, 04:20 »
+3
i'm totally anti-google but in this case sorry but Google owes you nothing and getty's complaints are pointless ... google images is a free service and they have their own terms of use, if you don't like you're free to block google from indexing your images and find a better deal with their competitors or pay google for pushing your pics on top of every search.

the issue at stake is google's dominance in search, but that's another story.
google has taken over the search market and played its cards well, now it's too late to be shocked at their dominance .. let me remind you when google came up 15 yrs ago their only competitors were cr-ap like Altavista, Yahoo, and Ask.com !

now google has spread like a virus into every possible niche, from e-commerce to maps and images and operating system (android, and much more) ... too late to cry they're dominant and that youtube's content is 90% pirate and illegal.

google is the world's leader in piracy, and this includes their core business, the search engine as they're using "snippets" of text giving nothing back to the legitimate owners, let alone asking permission for that, for a while they also paired the text with screenshots, which was illegal and they've been forced to stop .. but if no one stops them they will keep acting as if they "own" the entire web ... and they know very well their business would be unprofitable if they had to play by the rules, which goes the same way for FB and many others.

content producers are the ones paying the price for this modern "free economy" but it can't go on forever and companies like google and FB must be shut down.




ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #9 on: June 25, 2015, 07:04 »
+2
As this is specifically a microstock group, maybe you could tell us how to prevent our content, legitimately purchased and online, from being indexed by Google for subsequent free lifting by the world and his wife, which as I showed not long ago, Google openly advocates.

« Reply #10 on: June 25, 2015, 07:23 »
0
As this is specifically a microstock group, maybe you could tell us how to prevent our content, legitimately purchased and online, from being indexed by Google for subsequent free lifting by the world and his wife, which as I showed not long ago, Google openly advocates.

there are many ways, all server-side, these are the most common to avoid "hot linking" :

1 - block the googlebots using the robots.txt
2 - block them using ".htaccess"
3 - forbid bots from scraping any .jpg file


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2015, 11:19 »
+2
How can we do any of that on a buyer's website which we obviously have no access to?

« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2015, 12:19 »
0
How can we do any of that on a buyer's website which we obviously have no access to?

Exactly!  We can't.   +1 Sue.

Hard to believe any content producers would argue this is okay.  Antitrust laws exist for the exact reason of preventing such abuses by monopolies.   Hope Google gets spanked in this lawsuit.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
4723 Views
Last post December 06, 2008, 09:16
by leaf
2 Replies
2969 Views
Last post January 23, 2013, 05:54
by StockCube
4 Replies
1492 Views
Last post January 28, 2013, 00:31
by RacePhoto
23 Replies
7289 Views
Last post January 31, 2013, 21:37
by gostwyck
72 Replies
16346 Views
Last post December 08, 2013, 00:16
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle