Author Topic: Is this a copyright infringement? (Read 9200 times)

Alfred · « **on:** September 13, 2017, 11:08 »

Hi,
I have a question:

Is copyright infringement a use of my image as a basis for a new image?

My image (vector) from 2012:

newbielink:https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/london-skyline-grunge-style-102936080 [nonactive]

Images from another author, now in 2017:

newbielink:https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/london-art-watercolor-print-skyline-united-707634016 [nonactive]
newbielink:https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/london-art-watercolor-print-skyline-united-707634040 [nonactive]
newbielink:https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/london-art-watercolor-print-skyline-united-707633926 [nonactive]

...and more

Perfect similarity is not at all accidental, but only an outline is used.
Is this a copyright infringement?

Thanks

Minsc · « **Reply #1 on:** September 13, 2017, 11:23 »

Yes. It is.

I wonder why someone with 4600 images would want to risk getting their entire portfolio taken down.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #2 on:** September 13, 2017, 16:24 »

Yes it is. And this thief has done the same thing with another artist's vector of Las Vegas as he/she did with your skyline:

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/watercolor-art-print-skyline-las-vegas-707634022
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/las-vegas-nevada-skyline-detailed-vector-97812845

Shutterstock should be ashamed of themselves for letting this sort of thing through (I'm sure they don't care) but please do report it and tell them it needs to be removed.

Does anyone know Yuri Konovalov (the Las Vegas skyline contributor)? His portfolio's everywhere, but I couldn't find any contact info.

microtalk · « **Reply #3 on:** September 13, 2017, 16:50 »

Yes,

100% copyright infringement , no talk possible on that
Report this user to Shutterstock

Chichikov · « **Reply #4 on:** September 13, 2017, 23:14 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on September 13, 2017, 16:24

Yes it is. And this thief has done the same thing with another artist's vector of Las Vegas as he/she did with your skyline:

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/watercolor-art-print-skyline-las-vegas-707634022
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/las-vegas-nevada-skyline-detailed-vector-97812845

Shutterstock should be ashamed of themselves for letting this sort of thing through (I'm sure they don't care) but please do report it and tell them it needs to be removed.

Does anyone know Yuri Konovalov (the Las Vegas skyline contributor)? His portfolio's everywhere, but I couldn't find any contact info.

I have found and written him.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #5 on:** September 14, 2017, 00:47 »

Quote from: Minsc on September 13, 2017, 11:23

Yes. It is.

I wonder why someone with 4600 images would want to risk getting their entire portfolio taken down.

To be fair it is 4600 snapshots pretty much. The most saleable stuff in their is the stuff he's pinched from other people.

unnonimus · « **Reply #6 on:** September 14, 2017, 01:22 »

in the US it would probably fall under fair use because it is a new creative work that is derived from an existing work.

"Fair use is a doctrine originating in the law of the United States that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder"

Only a court of law can determine if a work falls under Fair Use.

However, Royalty Free licenses on most stock sites usually do not permit you to modify someone else's work and resell it.

It will not be copyright infringement, but it will be an infringement of the Royalty Free license they probably purchased it under.

Minsc · « **Reply #7 on:** September 14, 2017, 01:24 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on September 14, 2017, 00:47

To be fair it is 4600 snapshots pretty much. The most saleable stuff in their is the stuff he's pinched from other people.

True, but it's still a lot of work to upload all that stuff and get it approved. There are some good looking landscape and wildlife photos in there.

Alfred · « **Reply #8 on:** September 14, 2017, 01:46 »

Okay. Thanks to all. I write to SS support and also contact Yuri Konovalov. It looks like he used more vector panoramas.

memakephoto · « **Reply #9 on:** September 14, 2017, 08:25 »

Quote from: unnonimus on September 14, 2017, 01:22

in the US it would probably fall under fair use because it is a new creative work that is derived from an existing work.

"Fair use is a doctrine originating in the law of the United States that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder"

Only a court of law can determine if a work falls under Fair Use.

However, Royalty Free licenses on most stock sites usually do not permit you to modify someone else's work and resell it.

It will not be copyright infringement, but it will be an infringement of the Royalty Free license they probably purchased it under.

You copied that quote from wikipedia. Try using a source from an accredited intellectual property expert.

Fair use is for LIMITED and transformative use for the purpose of comment, critique or parody. This really isn't transformative and you can certainly NOT resell it as a stand alone product. It is copyright infringement.