Microstock Photography Forum - General > Image Sleuth

Abiding by the DMCA does not mean you "take copyright seriously"

(1/4) > >>

Justanotherphotographer:
Dear every agency out there,

Abiding by the DMCA does not mean you "take copyright seriously". We are sick and tired of reading and hearing that you “care”, then finding out your whole policy is just doing the minimum laid out by the DMCA.

Abiding by the DMCA is the absolute minimum you must do to avoid being sued when infringements show up on your site.

Even worse, and very common, is an agency out sourcing reports to a third party specialist company that assumes legal responsibility and handles all DMCA/ copyright related correspondence. This contractually prevents the company doing anything themselves.

These practices are absolutely disgusting from anyone claiming to represent creatives and we have had enough of the BS.

Simply following the DMCA without any other oversight or investigation of suspect accounts doesn’t prove you “take copyright seriously” it shows you absolutely do NOT take copyright seriously (beyond covering your A**) and only care about not getting sued. Quit the BS we can see through it.

Thanks

SpaceStockFootage:
So just guessing here, but... somebody filed a DMCA against you, the agency removed your content, but you believe the DMCA has no merit?

Justanotherphotographer:

--- Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on May 05, 2019, 06:14 ---So just guessing here, but... somebody filed a DMCA against you, the agency removed your content, but you believe the DMCA has no merit?

--- End quote ---

Nope, the opposite. I'm tired of informing agencies of portfolios with multiple infringements and being told I am not the copyright holder so they can't take any action.

Or reporting my work infringed and the thief sending a counter notice with easily checked made up information (for example copied off a business on the internet they have no connection to) and the agency accepting it because it covers them under the DMCA.

Or I have spent hours trying to track down contact info for other contributors to let them know their work has been stolen only to find the agency has only taken down the individual pieces of work in a portfolio that is entirely made up of stolen work. Leaving me and the others only option being to spend days tracking down every single other contributor infringed and getting them file takedowns one by one.

It is a joke. JUST doing the bare minimum the DMCA calls for clearly broadcasts "we would do even less if we could, but we can't by law without getting sued"

SpaceStockFootage:
Well it isn't their content (the agencies), and in some of the instances you've mentioned, it isn't your content either... so it's kind of understandable that nothing can be done. Surely you'd be the first to complain if you had some of your content removed by a DMCA submitted by some random person who isn't even the copyright owner?

Sure the setup isn't ideal, with plenty of shortfalls and loopholes, but I'm not sure what else you would suggest? Other than the agencies hiring teams of investigators at great cost for minimal, if any, return.

And if they did all this investigation stuff/research rather than just doing the minimum with regards to DMCA action (removing or not removing content based on the info/actions of the two parties... wouldn't they then not even be doing the minimum with regards to DMCA action?   

cathyslife:

--- Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on May 05, 2019, 07:33 ---Well it isn't their content (the agencies), and in some of the instances you've mentioned, it isn't your content either... so it's kind of understandable that nothing can be done. Surely you'd be the first to complain if you had some of your content removed by a DMCA submitted by some random person who isn't even the copyright owner?

Sure the setup isn't ideal, with plenty of shortfalls and loopholes, but I'm not sure what else you would suggest? Other than the agencies hiring teams of investigators at great cost for minimal, if any, return.

And if they did all this investigation stuff/research rather than just doing the minimum with regards to DMCA action (removing or not removing content based on the info/actions of the two parties... wouldn't they then not even be doing the minimum with regards to DMCA action?

--- End quote ---


I agree with your first paragraph. However, the agencies most certainly should investigate when multiple people complain about a whole portfolio of stolen work. Most of the legwork is being done for them, by contributors, free of charge! It’s a cost of doing business (or should be). And once one single stolen image is found in a portfolio, the whole port should come down and the contributor banned, not just the stolen image. But you see the agencies don’t care where their sales $$ comes from. Legal or illegal, no matter to them.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page