MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Image Sleuth => Topic started by: vectorsforall on June 29, 2021, 10:00
-
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/viocristela/video?sort=popular (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/viocristela/video?sort=popular)
-
This kind of stuff unfortunately has become so often nowadays.
You saw your products on it or heard of it?
-
I find this stuff simply by going on one of my products page and taking a look at 'similar products' below, and when I see a duplicate one I know I got the thief's portfolio
-
Wow u found one. Give me 20 minutes and I can find at least 10!
What a stupid reply. He's just trying to be helpful.
-
Wow u found one. Give me 20 minutes and I can find at least 10!
What a stupid reply. He's just trying to be helpful.
Why don't they do anything?
-
Wow u found one. Give me 20 minutes and I can find at least 10!
What a stupid reply. He's just trying to be helpful.
Why don't they do anything?
I made a DMCA notice for both accounts I just found.
-
Still no answer nor action from Shitter, 2 DMCA notices posted june 24th.
they don't even care
-
Wow u found one. Give me 20 minutes and I can find at least 10!
What a stupid reply. He's just trying to be helpful.
Why don't they do anything?
Easy question, because shitterstock banned the thieves and shitterstock continue earning money with the stolen videos.
-
11 days later still nothing and I found another thief's portfolio and again I send another DMCA notice.
Shitter is a thieves factory.
Not only they made big cut in our commissions without shame but also they are a heaven for thieves.
I'm starting considering closing my account even if I'm still doing some numbers there. Enough is enough
-
11 days later still nothing and I found another thief's portfolio and again I send another DMCA notice.
Shitter is a thieves factory.
Not only they made big cut in our commissions without shame but also they are a heaven for thieves.
I'm starting considering closing my account even if I'm still doing some numbers there. Enough is enough
I have to ask, because this comes up fairly often, but how does closing your account and losing the income, change anything about the thieves or make SS more proactive in removing thieves? All it does is hurt you?
The crooks come from all agencies, steal from all kinds of places, and spread their copied images in many places. This isn't just a SS issue.
I don't know why they move so slowly, but at least, when a valid complaint is filed, we have seen the accounts removed.
Good work finding and reporting them! :)
-
11 days later still nothing and I found another thief's portfolio and again I send another DMCA notice.
Shitter is a thieves factory.
Not only they made big cut in our commissions without shame but also they are a heaven for thieves.
I'm starting considering closing my account even if I'm still doing some numbers there. Enough is enough
I have to ask, because this comes up fairly often, but how does closing your account and losing the income, change anything about the thieves or make SS more proactive in removing thieves? All it does is hurt you?
The crooks come from all agencies, steal from all kinds of places, and spread their copied images in many places. This isn't just a SS issue.
I don't know why they move so slowly, but at least, when a valid complaint is filed, we have seen the accounts removed.
Good work finding and reporting them! :)
Thieves are very beneficial for agencies, they are really so much not proactive removing them that questions come - are most of thieves real people? Very beneficial workflows for agencies anyway.
-
11 days later still nothing and I found another thief's portfolio and again I send another DMCA notice.
Shitter is a thieves factory.
Not only they made big cut in our commissions without shame but also they are a heaven for thieves.
I'm starting considering closing my account even if I'm still doing some numbers there. Enough is enough
I have to ask, because this comes up fairly often, but how does closing your account and losing the income, change anything about the thieves or make SS more proactive in removing thieves? All it does is hurt you?
The crooks come from all agencies, steal from all kinds of places, and spread their copied images in many places. This isn't just a SS issue.
I don't know why they move so slowly, but at least, when a valid complaint is filed, we have seen the accounts removed.
Good work finding and reporting them! :)
Good point ;-) My anger speaks for myself
-
11 days later still nothing and I found another thief's portfolio and again I send another DMCA notice.
Shitter is a thieves factory.
Not only they made big cut in our commissions without shame but also they are a heaven for thieves.
I'm starting considering closing my account even if I'm still doing some numbers there. Enough is enough
I have to ask, because this comes up fairly often, but how does closing your account and losing the income, change anything about the thieves or make SS more proactive in removing thieves? All it does is hurt you?
The crooks come from all agencies, steal from all kinds of places, and spread their copied images in many places. This isn't just a SS issue.
I don't know why they move so slowly, but at least, when a valid complaint is filed, we have seen the accounts removed.
Good work finding and reporting them! :)
Thieves are very beneficial for agencies, they are really so much not proactive removing them that questions come - are most of thieves real people? Very beneficial workflows for agencies anyway.
Because all those dimes and quarters make such a big profit for SS?
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
"Hello,
Thank you for your email. Our requirements for submitting Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") notices of infringement are below. You may send a proper notice in reply to this email.
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
Infringement Notice Requirements:
1) A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
2) Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.
3) Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the Shutterstock to locate the material.
4) Information reasonably sufficient to permit the Shutterstock to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted.
5) A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
6) A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
Only the copyright owner or their authorized representative may file a report of copyright infringement. If you believe content on Shutterstock infringes someone else’s copyright, you may want to let the rights owner know.
Please note that we may provide the rights owner’s name, your email and the details of your report to the person who receives the complaint.
For more information, please review Shutterstock's DMCA Copyright Infringement Notice at: www.shutterstock.com/terms/dmca-notice (http://www.shutterstock.com/terms/dmca-notice).
Regards,
Shutterstock Compliance Team"
We must waste time listing blatant thief's portfolio by checking one by one every single product duplicated.
-
I've just sent another DMCA notice with more than 20 products listed (original mine and duplicate thief)
Let's see how these professionals will answer
-
I've just sent another DMCA notice with more than 20 products listed (original mine and duplicate thief)
Let's see how these professionals will answer
with so many copyright lawyers working on provision you are doing big mistake with DMCA.
deleting your contest is nothing, you could earn some serious money.
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
-
You may want to verify this before trying, but I believe you can send a DMCA through the ISP that hosts them instead of just through the company. It might get traction faster.
*this is not legal advice in any way, shape, or form*
edit to add: It may very well get your account closed as a punishment for going over their heads, but it should get the stolen images down.
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
This is legal boilerplate. It's supposed to discourage false and bothersome frivolous complaints. Imagine how some people are competitive and would file complaints, just to pester the competition? I agree, it seems odd that the reply to an inquiry is a rather intimidating warning. This is not new.
What's also odd, is back when we actually had contacts at SS and moderators, we could sometimes get a real human, HQ employee to look. They would forward the link to the infringing account and they would actually be shut down. Yes, sometimes it took weeks, for a fair and in depth investigation.
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
And now more exciting news, guess what?:
1. They haven't suspended the thief's portfolio, they just deleted the images I listed to them and let the portfolio online, but better than that,
2. They have deleted my original images!!! and the duplicate online. They deserve a premium gold award for this, I can't believe it ! :-(
Any action with lawyer will take years, money, energy, and even if I delete my account, the duplicate portfolio will continue having a good time. Shutterstock is thievesland, a true paradise!
Reel Anger.... >°{
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
And now more exciting news, guess what?:
1. They haven't suspended the thief's portfolio, they just deleted the images I listed to them and let the portfolio online, but better than that,
2. They have deleted my original images!!! and the duplicate online. They deserve a premium gold award for this, I can't believe it ! :-(
Any action with lawyer will take years, money, energy, and even if I delete my account, the duplicate portfolio will continue having a good time. Shutterstock is thievesland, a true paradise!
Reel Anger.... >°{
This is why I believe that SS is trying to milk what they can. If they could act to remove your images from the thief's port, then they could have just as easily removed the port. That conscious decision tells me volumes about what SS is now all about.
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
And now more exciting news, guess what?:
1. They haven't suspended the thief's portfolio, they just deleted the images I listed to them and let the portfolio online, but better than that,
2. They have deleted my original images!!! and the duplicate online. They deserve a premium gold award for this, I can't believe it ! :-(
Any action with lawyer will take years, money, energy, and even if I delete my account, the duplicate portfolio will continue having a good time. Shutterstock is thievesland, a true paradise!
Reel Anger.... >°{
This is why I believe that SS is trying to milk what they can. If they could act to remove your images from the thief's port, then they could have just as easily removed the port. That conscious decision tells me volumes about what SS is now all about.
I counted and in 15 minutes I found the following thieving accounts:
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/judexxx (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/judexxx)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/mageo (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/mageo)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Lourens+Myburgh (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Lourens+Myburgh)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Kiro+Nakamuro (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Kiro+Nakamuro)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/kadiralpargu (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/kadiralpargu)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/iiamtoey (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/iiamtoey)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/DigitalArt98 (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/DigitalArt98)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Marcia+Alvarez+Martin (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Marcia+Alvarez+Martin)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Rehman+Khoso (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Rehman+Khoso)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Gasnier+Chris (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Gasnier+Chris)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/lrasonja (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/lrasonja)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/PARVEEN9634 (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/PARVEEN9634)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Narendra853301 (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Narendra853301)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Ayush+tripathi+740 (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Ayush+tripathi+740)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Mr.+Picker (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Mr.+Picker)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Vaneet+Singhal (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Vaneet+Singhal)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/ChMuhammadAwaisKhaliq (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/ChMuhammadAwaisKhaliq)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/MuhammadAamerZaheer (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/MuhammadAamerZaheer)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Wazid+Khan+123 (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Wazid+Khan+123)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/BazykaMale (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/BazykaMale)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Farooq+Muhammad (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Farooq+Muhammad)
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Super+Firoz (https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Super+Firoz)
Just imagine I had done this for 4 hours...probably 100,000s or even millions of fraudulent pics uncovered by 1,000s of contributors. What if word got out their investors that even 5% of accounts at SS are fraudulent?!
How did I get started? Well I simply searched for "Unsplash" and found this pic and followed the similar trails. Anybody can do it...
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/unsplash-leafless-tree-on-body-water-2016074543 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/unsplash-leafless-tree-on-body-water-2016074543)
Oh and this thief need some geography lessons.
-
Thanks Brasilnut for showing us. It's hard enough to make my $.02 already without thieves! >:(
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
And now more exciting news, guess what?:
1. They haven't suspended the thief's portfolio, they just deleted the images I listed to them and let the portfolio online, but better than that,
2. They have deleted my original images!!! and the duplicate online. They deserve a premium gold award for this, I can't believe it ! :-(
Any action with lawyer will take years, money, energy, and even if I delete my account, the duplicate portfolio will continue having a good time. Shutterstock is thievesland, a true paradise!
Reel Anger.... >°{
This is why I believe that SS is trying to milk what they can. If they could act to remove your images from the thief's port, then they could have just as easily removed the port. That conscious decision tells me volumes about what SS is now all about.
Exactly! And soon they will just delete every contributors account with original creations and let the duplicate files on thieves ghosts portfolios (maybe they already own these) online, and here comes the money, as simply as that!
-
And after weeks of patience this is the answer oh these *insult removed* :
...
If you misrepresent that material is infringing, Shutterstock may terminate your Shutterstock account, or you may face other legal consequences.
...
Why don't they* do that to actual infringers also? And publicise that they're doing it?
*And all the other agencies/distributors.
...
Imagine the other way... I file a complaint, the account is shut down, while it's investigated. Would you like that? Guilty and convicted without any sort of fairness and trial? So the problem is, SS must have too many complaints stacked up and they are slow to complete the due diligence, before they can terminate someones source of income.
What's obvious for us, on the surface, has more complicated, legal implications. And they can't just close an account because of an accusation.
That's not what I meant.
They're saying they may take legal action over false accusations, to discourage people from making them.
Why don't they also take legal action over proven image theft? (to discourage people from doing it)
I found on of my BSs on iS on Flickr with some bloke claiming copyright. When I filled in the form to make a complaint, it said they would send the accusee my email address, which I thought was bizarre (but I sent a potentially throwaway addy). No word back, but there's a blank where the photo was and a note that it's under investigation for copyright infringement. (Maybe linking to my image on Getty scared them, or maybe it's automatic, but was blanked within 24 hrs.) This guy's whole port appears to be 'lifted', some with accreditation, most (that I checked) not.
Yes, and that wasn't a direct reply to you, but instead to the general thread and what I meant. I don't like the fact that they make a threat to someone who complains or at the least hint that our account could be closed, to stifle reporting.
Of course I'd agree, they should be more aggressive about image theft and accounts. Now what's the legal action against image theft? Lets say DMCA since that's the issue? Well, a stern warning or maybe closing the account and nothing happens. The laws do not back legal actions against image theft, because they are weak. If someone gets caught, nothing happens. No fines, no penalty, no legal deterrents.
What does a US law do in Asia for example? Nothing!
The thieves know that.
-
Here we go, Shitterstock team never stop the race to the bottom :
Neither they have not deleted the entire portfolio of the thief I have notified to them, but now he/she has put the files that they deleted again, and it's all online.
I've made again a DMCA notice with same dozens and dozens of duplicate files of my work because they did not delete his port.
And now in french (sorry):
J'en peux plus, je voudrais les avoir devant moi pour leur défoncer la gueule!!!!
-
I've kind of accepted the fact that once I upload my image out to the web I've lost control of that image. I've had my credit card (Chase) stolen twice in this year alone! If a bank cannot protect my credit card how the heck can the microstock companies protect our images especially if they are making money on our stolen images :-\
-
Here we go, Shitterstock team never stop the race to the bottom :
Neither they have not deleted the entire portfolio of the thief I have notified to them, but now he/she has put the files that they deleted again, and it's all online.
I've made again a DMCA notice with same dozens and dozens of duplicate files of my work because they did not delete his port.
And now in french (sorry):
J'en peux plus, je voudrais les avoir devant moi pour leur défoncer la gueule!!!!
je suis vraiment désolé Vectorsforall.
I've been spending my summer taking down those thieves ( I know, it's sad) and was 95% successful in doing so, but I was fortunate that none of them are on shutterstock website. I had a few with Adobe stock. pond5 and Envato Videohive and it was super easy to process via email, resulting in takedown and full account closure in 1-2 days (not a big fan in using DMCA forms - don't really like giving those thief's my personnel information). for Amazon, it was relatively easy, but wish they made it a bit easier by taking the infringement asset down across the whole amazon domain range (right now you need to file one IP infringement per country, amazon.com, amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, etc.....). the only one that I have problem with are torrent sites and some servers in china (only reason is because I can't write in Chinese to make a formal complain). for those 2 type, I usually ask for help from Adobe, pond5 or Envato (but never shuttertstock - they are useless).
the only outstanding site that I'm trying to take down at the moment is one that posted large image dumps with "proof of purchase" screengrab from shutterstock (the thief's are using it to show proof they purchased it if someone ask for it). I notified shutterstock about 1.5 month ago and still didn't get any results (only an acknowledgement they received my email).
I feel Shutterstock takes a huge percentage of income from my images and videos and I don't really get much protection from them.
Cheers everyone :)
-
Here we go, Shitterstock team never stop the race to the bottom :
Neither they have not deleted the entire portfolio of the thief I have notified to them, but now he/she has put the files that they deleted again, and it's all online.
I've made again a DMCA notice with same dozens and dozens of duplicate files of my work because they did not delete his port.
And now in french (sorry):
J'en peux plus, je voudrais les avoir devant moi pour leur défoncer la gueule!!!!
je suis vraiment désolé Vectorsforall.
I've been spending my summer taking down those thieves ( I know, it's sad) and was 95% successful in doing so, but I was fortunate that none of them are on shutterstock website. I had a few with Adobe stock. pond5 and Envato Videohive and it was super easy to process via email, resulting in takedown and full account closure in 1-2 days (not a big fan in using DMCA forms - don't really like giving those thief's my personnel information). for Amazon, it was relatively easy, but wish they made it a bit easier by taking the infringement asset down across the whole amazon domain range (right now you need to file one IP infringement per country, amazon.com, amazon.ca, amazon.co.uk, etc.....). the only one that I have problem with are torrent sites and some servers in china (only reason is because I can't write in Chinese to make a formal complain). for those 2 type, I usually ask for help from Adobe, pond5 or Envato (but never shuttertstock - they are useless).
the only outstanding site that I'm trying to take down at the moment is one that posted large image dumps with "proof of purchase" screengrab from shutterstock (the thief's are using it to show proof they purchased it if someone ask for it). I notified shutterstock about 1.5 month ago and still didn't get any results (only an acknowledgement they received my email).
I feel Shutterstock takes a huge percentage of income from my images and videos and I don't really get much protection from them.
Cheers everyone :)
Thanks Motionjunky
Ideally, there would be something to do maybe with Stock Coalition, making a deal with dedicated attorneys that could sue and make a permanent work of watching thieves around platforms/world, but would be lots of energy, time and mostly $$
-
"dedicated attorneys that could sue and make a permanent work of watching thieves around platforms/world, but would be lots of energy, time and mostly $$"
That is something the Microstock companies should provide since they get 80% of the sales. Not the contributors...
-
"dedicated attorneys that could sue and make a permanent work of watching thieves around platforms/world, but would be lots of energy, time and mostly $$"
That is something the Microstock companies should provide since they get 80% of the sales. Not the contributors...
Totally agree!
We have agreements! For what the agencies - sometimes before each upload -asking us, if we upload our own content?
So, if we do click yes, but it was stolen work from others, then there must be a strict reacting from the AGENCIES!
Like always and everywhere and in all kind of topics - politic, business and so on: The small people without much power have to pay the most - not only because they are more! The powerful rich people can pay helpers, who find tricky ways for not paying tax and so on. Some agencies are doing the same: NOTHING! And who wonder that SS is on the top of this?
-
Thanks Motionjunky
Ideally, there would be something to do maybe with Stock Coalition, making a deal with dedicated attorneys that could sue and make a permanent work of watching thieves around platforms/world, but would be lots of energy, time and mostly $$
Does the Stock Coalition even exist any more? There's no activity on the website. The last news update is over a year old.
-
Thanks Motionjunky
Ideally, there would be something to do maybe with Stock Coalition, making a deal with dedicated attorneys that could sue and make a permanent work of watching thieves around platforms/world, but would be lots of energy, time and mostly $$
Does the Stock Coalition even exist any more? There's no activity on the website. The last news update is over a year old.
I left the Facebook group about six months ago. There wasn't really much they were doing with respect to the original formation. Good that they tried but there just wasn't any meat to the actions. Not their fault. Only so much contributors can do without universally pulling all content and we know how that goes.
-
Finally, I found this monday that the thief portfolio has been deleted.
I guess that maybe some serious people are back from holidays...
So I'm now working on other thieves portfolio DMCA notices.
What a waste of time and energy >:(
-
BREAKING!
I just found that... No the thief portfolio is still online
Wrong joy, still living in Shitterworld
-
Somebody wrote that because of low pricing there is no benefit for SS to keep the thieves online. The real life shows the opposite. Otherwise they just investigate quickly and take them down. There is enough money flowing in with such accounts and all are kept by SS, no need to share a fraction to contributors. Not sure which is the real % of such accounts found by the contributors, it can be very small compare to not discovered ones.
-
There is no benefit for Shutterstock to pay people to delete thieves accounts
-
I've kind of accepted the fact that once I upload my image out to the web I've lost control of that image.
I think that's a reasonable conclusion. Anything on the web, can be stolen, and if there's a way someone else can make some money from that, they will.
Unlike music, films, streaming specials, and major entertainment, we aren't a big corporation or association with lobbying power and lots of attorneys. If the laws had some teeth and protected us, then we'd see less. There will never be an end, but at least some of the flaunting the law, because there's no punishment, would be stopped.
For some people to suggest that SS and the others, are making more money or some significant profit from stolen images is absurd. First, these images would need to have downloads and no one can show us that they are even getting that? Also for the pennies gained, that would be a flawed business plan to depend on unpaid funds as a source of profits?
For any agency to make money from stolen images, the would have to close the accounts and keep the profits, instead of allowing them to stay open and then pay the thieves. In other words, if an agency wanted to make money from stolen images, they would be more aggressive at closing accounts and keeping all the profits from the sale and the commissions.
Agencies make the same from an honest upload as a stolen image. There's no advantage, or company benefit, unless they close the accounts.
There is no benefit for Shutterstock to pay people to delete thieves accounts
Pretty well covers it? It costs money to have someone reviewing and closing accounts. Wages, health insurance, legal complications.
-
"Unlike music, films, streaming specials, and major entertainment, we aren't a big corporation or association with lobbying power and lots of attorneys. If the laws had some teeth and protected us, then we'd see less. There will never be an end, but at least some of the flaunting the law, because there's no punishment, would be stopped"
Torrents (i.e., BitTorrent) usually never get caught downloading movies or music. I've read 1/14,000 chance of getting caught. Yeah, we have read cases where someone got slammed (high fines) --- if they would have settled right off the bat their fines were fairly small and they know they got caught red handed yet took on the corp attorneys.