pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Resimstock - Turkish site stealing images and selling with EL?  (Read 20018 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: August 29, 2015, 08:34 »
+1
actually, even though the site is back online, it can only be good to have this raised here. I live in Turkey, did a quick search and, for the moment, plenty of warnings out there thanks in part to the OP. The name resimstock has effectively zero value, they may rebrand and move on, there is another stock site associated them, same address, enystock. So if that crops up, be wary.
Also, I just joined, followed on and off for a while. Great source of info and advice.
Michael


« Reply #51 on: August 29, 2015, 11:06 »
0
The name resimstock has effectively zero value, they may rebrand and move on, there is another stock site associated them, same address, enystock.
Michael
That is the actual company I think, the site said that they were enystock trading as Resimstock or something similar I think.

« Reply #52 on: September 04, 2015, 02:42 »
0
good to know,thanks

« Reply #53 on: September 08, 2015, 13:19 »
0
hey guys quick update:
i was today out of office and our firm did get a letter from the procuratorial.
so my attorney went there to inform himself over the issue.
this firm had start a prosecution against us  ;D
my lawyer told me that we had used a cultuca rm content for over 5,5 years.
and now they demanding over 1.800 for settlement.
p.s. i remember that i took this picture with our web designer at that time from adidas turkeys page, because i thought it was kind a cool and hip.
all this is just a joke from now on for me, i told my lawyer to accept nothing  8)

« Reply #54 on: September 08, 2015, 14:25 »
+3
hey guys quick update:
i was today out of office and our firm did get a letter from the procuratorial.
so my attorney went there to inform himself over the issue.
this firm had start a prosecution against us  ;D
my lawyer told me that we had used a cultuca rm content for over 5,5 years.
and now they demanding over 1.800 for settlement.
p.s. i remember that i took this picture with our web designer at that time from adidas turkeys page, because i thought it was kind a cool and hip.
all this is just a joke from now on for me, i told my lawyer to accept nothing  8)

So are you saying that you actually DID use a rights-managed image you weren't supposed to?

« Reply #55 on: September 08, 2015, 14:35 »
0
i don't understand by meaning you weren't supposed to?
the same picture was also on google but with lower quality.
so we took it with right click and safe as, all people i know do this here.
whats the the matter?
you really don't expect that someone pays that much (except maybe very big international corporates).
and after paying you are limited in time, come on.

« Reply #56 on: September 08, 2015, 14:49 »
+3
So here's the business model: You live in a place where you know all content is stolen. You pretend to be the copyright owner and send out random demands for payment, which will be taken seriously since everyone is in violation. If they pay, they still won't be in compliance, but no one cares one way or the other. I don't much care for either side in this battle.

« Reply #57 on: September 08, 2015, 14:57 »
0
if they can go legal and they are, they must have show something,
but please can someone in god sake explain to me in a easy way
whats this whole matter with rights managed content?

« Reply #58 on: September 08, 2015, 15:21 »
+1
Sorry for being late but this requires a lot more than just a bucket of popcorn...

Anywho, let the discussion begin :D

« Reply #59 on: September 08, 2015, 15:41 »
0
excuse me but i really dont understand the reaction from cathyslife?
it felt like that im accused and im the guilty part

« Reply #60 on: September 08, 2015, 15:49 »
+4
excuse me but i really dont understand the reaction from cathyslife?
it felt like that im accused and im the guilty part

It sounds like you are taking images that interest you from Google Images and using them in your designs. Is that what you do? That is illegal, and any time you do that, it directly takes money from people on this forum. So, people are trying figure out if that is what you do. Images you use should be licensed from the people who create them or the agencies that represent them, not stolen from elsewhere online.

« Reply #61 on: September 08, 2015, 16:05 »
0
sorry ppdd but,
if i can get it on google without watermarks, then its for me legal.
google images and their search function is the same like on 'your agencies'.
main problem is that these agencies and photographers mislead customers on purpose.
For example in my country many people dont understand proper english, but on these sites
you have royalty free images (that leads to misunderstandings) or like in my case they invent licenses with absurd fees.
theres a big problem in this stock business

« Reply #62 on: September 08, 2015, 16:11 »
+12
There is a zero percent chance that anyone on this board gives a crap about your argument.

« Reply #63 on: September 08, 2015, 16:19 »
0
thats your opinion and i respect it,
im just a layman and thats my point of view.
these are my thoughts or rather that is what i learn from my investigations.
like they say: each man to his own

« Reply #64 on: September 08, 2015, 16:54 »
+1
When you did investigations you should have seen: "This image may be copyrighted." The meaning of copyright is known by everyone also laymans. Sorry, no comprehension for your situation.

« Reply #65 on: September 08, 2015, 17:04 »
+11
sorry ppdd but,
if i can get it on google without watermarks, then its for me legal.
google images and their search function is the same like on 'your agencies'.
main problem is that these agencies and photographers mislead customers on purpose.
For example in my country many people dont understand proper english, but on these sites
you have royalty free images (that leads to misunderstandings) or like in my case they invent licenses with absurd fees.
theres a big problem in this stock business

That's like saying "If I can kill you without being caught, then is legal"
Good luck, **hole

« Reply #66 on: September 08, 2015, 17:16 »
+8
sorry ppdd but,
if i can get it on google without watermarks, then its for me legal.
google images and their search function is the same like on 'your agencies'.
main problem is that these agencies and photographers mislead customers on purpose.
For example in my country many people dont understand proper english, but on these sites
you have royalty free images (that leads to misunderstandings) or like in my case they invent licenses with absurd fees.
theres a big problem in this stock business

You may have found the image on google but you do not have a valid use license.  Use of unlicensed images makes you nothing more than a thief. 


« Reply #67 on: September 08, 2015, 17:30 »
+1
to loop,
thats not a very nice behave from you.
i try to keep my objective  level as i can in my situation.
i also dont understand how this conversation came to this point where im the badguy?
thanks to this group and other comments in the internet i think i have a distance view.
how many photographers had complain in this forum about not getting paid or too late?
ok getty and his allegiance do infringement, shutterstock withdraw money from customers on the behalf of auto renew wihout permission. And this goes and goes.
So by all respect every body should handle sometimes critic and the main difference between us is, im attacking no one like you do.
Final note: Then please prohibit google in his actions, if you can.

« Reply #68 on: September 08, 2015, 17:37 »
0
and if i should loose legal proceedings (which is impossible in my opion), im man enough to pay for my mistakes, if there is someone 8)
In what kind of world are we living in?
1800 for 5,5 years for using a single picture, sorry equipped with rights managed license, i forgot. ::)
« Last Edit: September 08, 2015, 17:47 by kudrt »

« Reply #69 on: September 08, 2015, 23:28 »
+8
We are living in a world where people who work deserve to get paid, not have someone steal their work. I am not sure what world you are living in.


Just because you find something unwatermarked on google, doesnt mean its free for you to use. And then come to this forum and talk about it like its perfectly ok.


 ::)

« Reply #70 on: September 09, 2015, 00:11 »
+9
I hope you get sued by Adidas, you have now admitted you and your "designer" stole the image. I suspected there could be more to this earlier in the thread when I said I hope those complaining had actually licensed images for use.

You may think people are being rude to you, but frankly that is nothing like as bad as stealing someone's work without the license. It is like being offended that someone swore at you after you mugged them.


« Reply #71 on: September 09, 2015, 11:05 »
+1
kudrt, have you ever noticed that you can filter images in Google search based on usage rights? It's just your imagination that you can use anything without a license just because it appears in Google search.

« Reply #72 on: September 09, 2015, 14:37 »
+3
Even then I wouldn't  trust the copyright status reported on google.  Their whole model relies on giving other people's stuff away (take a look at youtube). Those images could still be stolen and relabled by the thief. Only trust images licensed from a reliable source, especially for your "not small" business.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 03:33 by Justanotherphotographer »

LSI

« Reply #73 on: September 09, 2015, 20:11 »
+6
Oh man.... *palm-face* + *rolling-eyes* so bad that it got lost in its socket.
I really have to answer kudrt in Turkish, in a way he'll get it...

"Egitim sart."
Kendini savunmandaki cehaletine aciyorum.

Such a typical, low class, and uneducated opinion.
Yes, what you did and do does make you a photo thief.
Uneducated people like yourself, have a tendancy to close mindedly talk and talk annnnd talk as though thay have a right to do anything they want.
Well you don't.
Stop stealing and justifying yourself, just go start researching copyright.



« Last Edit: September 09, 2015, 20:15 by Kuzeytac »

« Reply #74 on: September 09, 2015, 23:37 »
+4
Even then I wouldn't  trust google.  Their whole model relies on giving other people's  stuff away. Those images could still be stolen and relabled. Only trust images licensed from a reliable source, especially for your "not small" business.

Google is not the fault. It's just a search. Do you find a book on Google and copy it, for sale? Do you find a song with Google and then resell it as your own. Then why do you accuse Google of being the problem because people find photos and steal them?

What does trusting Google have to do with any of this? It's just a search like every other search. They don't sell or license.

The problem is people like kudrt who are either ignoring the laws and trying to make an excuse or don't understand the laws. Just because anybody can find something on the internet, that doesn't mean it's free. Legally ignorance is not a defense. kudrt is pretending that the laws he doesn't know or understand don't exist because he doesn't know them.

Then kudrt makes up some childish finders keepers legal argument and like you, and tries to blame Google instead of the people who steal. If the door is unlocked, and you walk in and steal things from a house, is it their fault for not locking the door, or yours for stealing?

Should the internet make searching illegal?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
25 Replies
15754 Views
Last post May 18, 2012, 00:30
by Fran
17 Replies
8916 Views
Last post May 10, 2011, 12:17
by cathyslife
2 Replies
2461 Views
Last post September 06, 2014, 17:33
by munrotoo
0 Replies
1256 Views
Last post September 17, 2014, 04:21
by Madpixblue
5 Replies
2081 Views
Last post September 20, 2016, 21:50
by etudiante_rapide

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle