Pinterest valued at $1.5 BILLION, bags $100m in funding
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/17/pinterest_raises_100m/


now W-T-F !!
This gang of leechers, well known and proud pirates and copyright infringers ...

so now it's official ... investors don't give a F_uck_ing sh-it about copyright and stolen photos, they're all laughing all the way to the bank and who cares if MILLIONS of stolen pictures are already available and stored in Pinterest servers ?

this is the typical "F_uc_k and forget" silicon valley approach ...throwing the sh-it at the wall and see what sticks ... no matter how .. and no matter if content is stolen or original ... that's stuff for the lawyers eventually or the gullible ones buying their stock later or the new inventors joining their ponzi schemes ...

i'm really tempted to launch a piratebay-style web site where not only you can download torrent links but paying an annual fee you can download your whole zipped pirated files ... photoshop .. lightroom .. autocad .. whatever ...  and who cares after all as no one is going in jail and the Pirate parties are now even represented in the german and swedish parlament

NEVER as in 2012 creatives and photographers have been scr-ewed so bad, fact !
we might as well soon get another job, or apply at Pinterest, Flickr, Facebook, Google ... as once the photo business will be finally killed they will be the only ones left dealing with images and who knows they could even start selling online our stolen images claiming they're "orphan works".

Being here, I assume you generally sell on microstock sites, which means you offer your shots to be downloaded en masse, by anyone with just a handfull of dollars for something like $.5 a pop, or probabaly even less... 25 a day, etc, and they can upload them anywhere after that, of course.... then you whine about some of your shots ending up on pinterest servers? : ) ehmmm.... get a clue... maybe? and your buddies too... really.

Quote from: antistock on May 17, 2012, 11:40

Pinterest valued at $1.5 BILLION, bags $100m in funding
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/17/pinterest_raises_100m/


now W-T-F !!
This gang of leechers, well known and proud pirates and copyright infringers ...

so now it's official ... investors don't give a F_uck_ing sh-it about copyright and stolen photos, they're all laughing all the way to the bank and who cares if MILLIONS of stolen pictures are already available and stored in Pinterest servers ?

this is the typical "F_uc_k and forget" silicon valley approach ...throwing the sh-it at the wall and see what sticks ... no matter how .. and no matter if content is stolen or original ... that's stuff for the lawyers eventually or the gullible ones buying their stock later or the new inventors joining their ponzi schemes ...

i'm really tempted to launch a piratebay-style web site where not only you can download torrent links but paying an annual fee you can download your whole zipped pirated files ... photoshop .. lightroom .. autocad .. whatever ...  and who cares after all as no one is going in jail and the Pirate parties are now even represented in the german and swedish parlament

NEVER as in 2012 creatives and photographers have been scr-ewed so bad, fact !
we might as well soon get another job, or apply at Pinterest, Flickr, Facebook, Google ... as once the photo business will be finally killed they will be the only ones left dealing with images and who knows they could even start selling online our stolen images claiming they're "orphan works".

Being here, I assume you generally sell on microstock sites, which means you offer your shots to be downloaded en masse, by anyone with just a handfull of dollars for something like $.5 a pop, or probabaly even less... 25 a day, etc, and they can upload them anywhere after that, of course.... then you whine about some of your shots ending up on pinterest servers? : ) ehmmm.... get a clue... maybe? and your buddies too... really.

I see you are a newbie here and this is your first post. Like I'm going to listen to anything you have to say. Troll.

By the way, I have complained on the DT forums. Achilles has jumped in. Here's the thread:

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_31459

I am hoping that some of you fellow contributors who express yourselves way more eloquently than I will help out with getting an opt out or having the Share button removed from our images.

I am not convinced at all that people pinning images from DT or any other site or posting to FB are translating into whopping sales for us contributors. I think the same people who are using these images are the same ones who think that anything on the internet is free for their taking.  

Quote from: cclapper on May 18, 2012, 16:28

By the way, I have complained on the DT forums. Achilles has jumped in. Here's the thread:

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_31459

I am hoping that some of you fellow contributors who express yourselves way more eloquently than I will help out with getting an opt out or having the Share button removed from our images.

I am not convinced at all that people pinning images from DT or any other site or posting to FB are translating into whopping sales for us contributors. I think the same people who are using these images are the same ones who think that anything on the internet is free for their taking.  

I followed your post ... and the response -- or, should I say, "The Spin?"   

Achilles made some good points. He is concerned that social media is such a powerful trend that he ignores it at his peril, and he is probably right. He can't afford to fail to use promotional media that Getty is exploiting.

However, I think we should try to hold the microstock agencies' feet to the fire on this. More and more, it looks like the social media sites and Google are mounting a broad and very real attack on copyright itself (look at the posts of the troll who joined here just to attack us today, look at the Pirate party in the German legislature, and the way that the Polish gov voted to support the pirates). We have a lot to lose if they win.

Quote from: WarrenPrice on May 18, 2012, 17:02

Quote from: cclapper on May 18, 2012, 16:28

By the way, I have complained on the DT forums. Achilles has jumped in. Here's the thread:

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_31459

I am hoping that some of you fellow contributors who express yourselves way more eloquently than I will help out with getting an opt out or having the Share button removed from our images.

I am not convinced at all that people pinning images from DT or any other site or posting to FB are translating into whopping sales for us contributors. I think the same people who are using these images are the same ones who think that anything on the internet is free for their taking.  

I followed your post ... and the response -- or, should I say, "The Spin?"   

Achilles made some good points. He is concerned that social media is such a powerful trend that he ignores it at his peril, and he is probably right. He can't afford to fail to use promotional media that Getty is exploiting.

However, I think we should try to hold the microstock agencies' feet to the fire on this. More and more, it looks like the social media sites and Google are mounting a broad and very real attack on copyright itself (look at the posts of the troll who joined here just to attack us today, look at the Pirate party in the German legislature, and the way that the Polish gov voted to support the pirates). We have a lot to lose if they win.

Attack? I sell microstock too. I'm trying to help, because I see most of you are so incredibly clueless, you go on a rapmage and end up talking... talking?... shouting against your own interest all the time. You are some of the most misled, misinformed people I'v ever seen on the net. No wonder they rip most of you off all the time again and again and again. Don't any of you think, after being humiliated and shafted continuously for years, that maybe, just maybe, you should listen to someone who actually knows whats happening? Correct me if I'm wrong my friend but just about everything happening points towards the conclusion that you ppl are totally incapable of doing anything in your own interest. With the pirate party, once again, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Some enlightenment (clue stick )

http://www.archive.org/download/http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012

I have found one of my images w/ an IS watermark on there but the image has been removed from IS. It has been repinned a number of times. I doubt it is somehow going to lead to a sale at IS.

I think pinterest is playing fast and loose w/ copyright. The fact that you can use images on pinterest in your blog is completely bogus. I don't know how to search to find images that well on there. If you don't just stumble onto them or they aren't listed with your info then you might never see them.

IF watermarked images from sites were up there and the link took them to the site to buy the image and they couldn't be used for a blog, then that would be ok, but that isn't what the situation is. At least some of the watermarked images seem to lead back to the sites, but others don't. It is a mess.

There will be a messy pinterest lawsuit soon, and pinterest will try to pass the blame to the users, who will plead ignorance.

' If you find any of your own images on Pinterest that you would like removed, click on the violating pin, select "Report Pin" from the options on the right, and fill out the form related to intellectual property.'

Either it is infringement or it isn't.  It isn't a personal decision.

Being here, I assume you generally sell on microstock sites, which means you offer your shots to be downloaded en masse, by anyone with just a handfull of dollars for something like $.5 a pop, or probabaly even less... 25 a day, etc, and they can upload them anywhere after that, of course.... then you whine about some of your shots ending up on pinterest servers? : ) ehmmm.... get a clue... maybe? and your buddies too... really.

for the record, i'm 50% micro RF and 50% macro RM and trying to diversify with art galleries and fine art.
and for me it's not a matter of price but of principle.

please show me any tangible benefit for getting my photos stolen by the freetards pinning all day on Pinterest or FB.

besides, what about my RM photos where the clients pay more exactly to have exclusivity, just to see it later pinned all around Pinterest with a Getty watermark ?

so of course you're assuming wrong, and you would be wrong even if i was only selling micro RF subs or posting for fun on flickr.

i guess 90% of the whole internet is made of stolen content, and they make billions on it while we get ZERO back, not even a credit, a link, a thank you, zero !
it's outright theft, pure and simple.

Quote from: drugal on May 18, 2012, 18:29

... just about everything happening points towards the conclusion that you ppl are totally incapable of doing anything in your own interest. With the pirate party, once again, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Some enlightenment (clue stick )

Your suggestion is ... ?

Quote

http://www.archive.org/download/http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012

 "The item you have requested has a problem with one or more of the metadata files that describe it, which prevents us from displaying this page."

As always ppl ant some 'magic answer'. There is none. First of all you should have punished these severely unfair agencies when they started shafting you... but that should have happened years ago, by deactivating / removing images. You could have very very effectively protested without even leaving the comfort of your room.... and you ppl did.... tadaaa.. nothin'. You didn't want to loose a few dollars, now you are going to loose everything (not becouse of hackers, because you are poens for the agencies) I'd say thats somewhat more important than pointlessly ranting for hours and days about watermarked thumbnails popping up here and there.

Other thing is that if you take place and promote a market like this, at least look around and see the tendencies. As technology progresses, the price of many generic things (storage, music, etc...) including generic images, is on a curve to zero. Theres nothing you can do about it. Actually endorsing the microstock model for years, you are one of the many ppl making sure this happens. You helped aggressively pushing the price of something down happily went on creating oversupply.... did you seriously think it's just gonna stop at a point comfortable to you despite your own actions? : ) Welcome to the world: it wont. It will keep sliding.


Heres the link:
-http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012-

Had to post it like this, the board engine is broken, keeps messing up the url.

Quote from: ShadySue on May 18, 2012, 18:35

Quote from: drugal on May 18, 2012, 18:29

... just about everything happening points towards the conclusion that you ppl are totally incapable of doing anything in your own interest. With the pirate party, once again, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Some enlightenment (clue stick )

Your suggestion is ... ?

Quote

http://www.archive.org/download/http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012

 "The item you have requested has a problem with one or more of the metadata files that describe it, which prevents us from displaying this page."

As always ppl ant some 'magic answer'. There is none.

So the point of your rant was just to say, "If only we hadn't..." You can't roll back time. We have to deal with the situation as it is.
The real "If only..." is not about micro pricing, it's actually about the RF model, no matter the price; it makes it very difficult to be certain if an unwatermarked 'find' is a use by a legitimate buyer or not.

Heres the link:
-http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012-

Had to post it like this, the board engine is broken, keeps messing up the url.

The board engine is not broken.
http://www.archive.org/download/http://archive.org/details/MaxKeiserRadio-TheTruthAboutMarkets-04February2012
I will warn people, which you did not, that this is a 52 minute audio file.
I'm sure what they said could be much more succinctly listed by someone who has enough spare time to listen to it.

mess up, then say you can't roll back time? thats all? what kind of attitude is that?

Realistic.
Your alternative is?

Quote from: djpadavona on May 18, 2012, 20:59

Quote from: cclapper on May 18, 2012, 10:36

Quote from: Tabimura on May 18, 2012, 03:54

^^ Agree with everything.

Did anyone contacted Dreamstime or Depositphotos regarding their "feature" of sharing our work on Pinterest?

I just sent an email to DT asking them to remove the Share button from my images. Maybe others here could do the same?

What will this accomplish? There are so many ways to share files, social media is just a drop in the ocean. Where is the harm in someone posting a watermarked image to their Twitter feed to say that they really liked this particular photo, or whatever?

I think you are all pretty much guaranteeing that stock competition will dry up. Getty is using social media to its full advantage. You want competition for Getty, but you are denying agencies the ability to utilize social media to compete with them.

Will having your images shared on social media sites lead to sales? No. The main benefit is to the agency, which gets added attention from Google and other search engines which recognize a flurry of activity involving the agency. But if you want real competition in this space, you have to allow smaller agencies to create a social media buzz per Getty.

I'll tell you right now that I had a similar idea at Warmpicture to allow social media sharing. But I scrapped the idea because I knew what the reaction would be. I know this won't change any of your minds. But when there is basically one or two agencies left in 5 years and your commissions are even worse than they already are, you will have nothing to complain about because you killed the ability for smaller agencies to compete in the social media space, which is arguably one of the important battle grounds currently being considered by Google.

you are right. everything that is being done with social media is for the agencys benefit, not mine. there are tens of thousands of contributors on DT. my having the share button pulled from my images isnt going to much effect on that for DT, just as my leaving IS had no effect on how they do business. its about the principle. it is NOT ok for agencys to arbitrarily decide what gets done with my images without asking or providing an opt out. i am getting really tired of other people USING me and my property to make millions, while paying me less and less every day. I call bull$hit.

And there (the bold statement) is "The Spin."  What is good for the Agency is good for the contributor.

@Achilles ... I beat you to it.  

Or, maybe not?  

Quote from: drugal on May 19, 2012, 09:35

mess up, then say you can't roll back time? thats all? what kind of attitude is that?

Realistic.

no its just repetitive denial

Your alternative is?

??  I'm not the one whining, opening threads about pinterest, blogs, etc, etc. So... what are you going to do? Any action plan, anyone?