MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: grafix04 on June 06, 2012, 10:34
-
I'm sorry, yes, yet another Pinterest thread.
I was looking for ways that photographers could perhaps band together and look out for each and their intellectual property. By now I've figured, waiting for someone to sue could be a long way away and in the meantime we have disrespectful agents like DT, 123rf and DP making matters worse with their 'pin-it' button. It's a losing battle and our only hope of reducing copyright infringement on Pinterest, is to notify photographers and scare/educate those pesky 'pinners'.
I remembered PicScout and the ImageExhange plug-in and thought that would be a great tool we could use to find copyright infringements. So off I went and loaded my plug-in and just when I thought it couldn't get any worse, it did! Those thieving little scammers at Pinterest have gone and fiddled with their code again, this time to avoid any infringements being picked up by PicScout, which is now owned by Getty.
If you've never used ImageExchange, it's a nifty little plug-in that runs on the side of your browser. As you browse images, any image that is hosted on microstock (or other agents) is found with details of the image owner and a link back to the relevant agent. Using PicScout's ImageExchange would have made it easy to see which images on Pinterest are RF/RM.
I then went hunting for an answer trying to find how Pinterest could avoid PicScount but I couldn't find anything as yet, however, I did find this article below which is very interesting:
Pinterest Locked in Statement with Image Owners (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/gigaom/articles/2012_05_30_pinterest_locked_in_stalemate_with_image_owners.html)
Have a read.
-
Interesting. But by the time a solution is found, if any, the damage will be done. I found this interesting:
Getty could try to affect the Pinterest user experience by taking down as many pictures as possible, but, as Rosenblatt notes, Getty isn’t large enough to have that big an impact.
If Getty isn't large enough, what chance do we lowly contributors have? >:(
-
Interesting. But by the time a solution is found, if any, the damage will be done. I found this interesting:
Getty could try to affect the Pinterest user experience by taking down as many pictures as possible, but, as Rosenblatt notes, Getty isn’t large enough to have that big an impact.
If Getty isn't large enough, what chance do we lowly contributors have? >:(
Exactly. Maybe a class action lawsuit? Even so, that would take years and the damage by then would already be done. We need to scare those 'pinners'. We should comment on people's pin's saying it's a copyright infringement and add a link to our agent (not one with the pin-it button), telling them to license the image. That will probably be more effective than sending a DMCA.
-
So glad you posted the article's link! I clicked through a few of its links and learned Pinterest is already making money, even though it's still in beta. How? By removing referral/affiliate links and adding its own...and they don't disclose they are changing referral/affiliate link info. >:( Some bloggers think this sneaky little problem might be the way in which to sue Pinterest for copyright infringement.
http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/ (http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/)
http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/ (http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/)
-
So glad you posted the article's link! I clicked through a few of its links and learned Pinterest is already making money, even though it's still in beta. How? By removing referral/affiliate links and adding its own...and they don't disclose they are changing referral/affiliate link info. >:( Some bloggers think this sneaky little problem might be the way in which to sue Pinterest for copyright infringement.
[url]http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/[/url] ([url]http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/[/url])
[url]http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/[/url] ([url]http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/[/url])
I heard about them removing Amazon affiliate links and I've heard Zazzle members complaining about disappearing affiliate codes on their links. That was the first I've heard about Linkshare. From what I've heard, Pinterest doesn't change the link right away. The sneaky *insult removed* wait a while and strip it weeks later so the affiliates don't notice anything, or by the time they do, it's already been 'repinned' with Pinterest's own affiliate links.
As terrible as that is, it's also great because they can't hide behind "safe harbor". We just need someone with some grunt to take to court. Another plus is that affiliates will have no reason to use them anymore, which leaves only those housewives who pin without realizing they are breaking the law. We should scare them away.
Next image I find one of my images on there, I will be adding a comment saying that they did not ask my permission to use the image and therefore have infringed on my copyright. I will demand they purchase a license from my favorite agent and a few days later send a DMCA. Word will get around and eventually they'll be to scared to 'pin' anything.
We should all do that.
-
So glad you posted the article's link! I clicked through a few of its links and learned Pinterest is already making money, even though it's still in beta. How? By removing referral/affiliate links and adding its own...and they don't disclose they are changing referral/affiliate link info. >:( Some bloggers think this sneaky little problem might be the way in which to sue Pinterest for copyright infringement.
[url]http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/[/url] ([url]http://www.hasoffers.com/blog/affiliate-links-kill-pinterest/[/url])
[url]http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/[/url] ([url]http://llsocial.com/2012/02/pinterest-modifying-user-submitted-pins/[/url])
I heard about them removing Amazon affiliate links and I've heard Zazzle members complaining about disappearing affiliate codes on their links. That was the first I've heard about Linkshare. From what I've heard, Pinterest doesn't change the link right away. The sneaky *insult removed* wait a while and strip it weeks later so the affiliates don't notice anything, or by the time they do, it's already been 'repinned' with Pinterest's own affiliate links.
As terrible as that is, it's also great because they can't hide behind "safe harbor". We just need someone with some grunt to take to court. Another plus is that affiliates will have no reason to use them anymore, which leaves only those housewives who pin without realizing they are breaking the law. We should scare them away.
Next image I find one of my images on there, I will be adding a comment saying that they did not ask my permission to use the image and therefore have infringed on my copyright. I will demand they purchase a license from my favorite agent and a few days later send a DMCA. Word will get around and eventually they'll be to scared to 'pin' anything.
We should all do that.
Pin was using Skimlinks but publicly admitted to have stopped the practice. See the link from Feb 2012
http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213 (http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213)
They've probably found another sleazy scheme by now.
-
Pin was using Skimlinks but publicly admitted to have stopped the practice. See the link from Feb 2012
[url]http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213[/url] ([url]http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213[/url])
They've probably found another sleazy scheme by now.
Good to know, thanks for the link.
You're right, they probably have found another way or will in future. It wouldn't surprise me if they have a bunch of fake memberships registered that are 'pinning' using their own affiliate code or 're-pinning' to alter the link to replace code with their own.
-
Pin was using Skimlinks but publicly admitted to have stopped the practice. See the link from Feb 2012
[url]http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213[/url] ([url]http://marketingland.com/pinterest-skimlinks-might-try-ads-copyright-issues-not-significant-6213[/url])
They've probably found another sleazy scheme by now.
Good to know, thanks for the link.
You're right, they probably have found another way or will in future. It wouldn't surprise me if they have a bunch of fake memberships registered that are 'pinning' using their own affiliate code or 're-pinning' to alter the link to replace code with their own.
Thanks for the article! :) Pinterest is still removing affiliate links on my Zazzle and Skreend products, but it doesn't appear they are replacing them with their own anymore.