MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: My image used for collage on Flickr - fight over copyright...  (Read 22782 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: August 03, 2010, 17:15 »
0
... That's how it usually goes. Old stuff still sells - new stuff gets buried... :)

Don't say that. It makes it look like as if there is no more money in microstock  :o

lol
Ok, well, it's not exactly like this...always, but often it is.

That's true  ;)


« Reply #26 on: August 03, 2010, 17:44 »
0
I definitely dont want to hijack this thread, can i chime in with a question about one of my pics please? I never used this Flickr thing, probably never will and im not sure how it all works.
I also found one of my pictures there (the magic book) with another one just slammed on top and was wondering if something like this is considered legal use? "All rights reserved" is a bit vague (think i need some education too  :-\)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67824406@N00/4559439540/#sizes/o/
(nice piece of photoshopping too, dontcha think?  ;))

« Reply #27 on: August 03, 2010, 17:57 »
0
I definitely dont want to hijack this thread, can i chime in with a question about one of my pics please? I never used this Flickr thing, probably never will and im not sure how it all works.
I also found one of my pictures there (the magic book) with another one just slammed on top and was wondering if something like this is considered legal use? "All rights reserved" is a bit vague (think i need some education too  :-\)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67824406@N00/4559439540/#sizes/o/
(nice piece of photoshopping too, dontcha think?  ;))


I don't care about etiquette in such situations. I dare to assume that this image wasn't purchased to be a composite of that caliber.

I'd definitely contact the member asking where they purchased it from.

This should quickly resolve your issue.

Send that message twice if you don't get a response.

If no response after second time contact Yahoo with a DMCA notice - done.

Please don't take this as legal advise. This is how I do things and so far I've never found one user who did purchase the image.
Maybe this would be the first time, who knows. I'd give it a shot.

Thanks for hijacking, as this is for educational purposes!

« Reply #28 on: August 03, 2010, 18:14 »
0
I found this through tineye

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/doingmediastudies/4684752486/#

Please follow up. It says copyright Shutterstock.


Quote
2.
By this Agreement, Shutterstock grants you a personal, non-exclusive, non-transferable, right to use and reproduce Images in the following ways, subject to the limitations set forth herein and in Part II hereof:
a)
On web sites, provided that no Image is displayed at a resolution greater than 800 x 600 pixels;
...
10.
Resell, redistribute or transfer any Image except as specifically provided herein. Displaying any Image in any digital format or for any digital use at a resolution greater than 800 x 600 pixels, except in preliminary design work, will be deemed to be an attempt to redistribute the Image and could result in the termination of your rights under this agreement.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 18:21 by click_click »

vonkara

« Reply #29 on: August 03, 2010, 18:35 »
0
I found this through tineye

Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/doingmediastudies/4684752486/#

Please follow up. It says copyright Shutterstock.



This is redistributing the image completely free. I could save it to my computer right now and spread it, in random free torrents all over the web.

 For my part, I would contact Shutterstock, saying that one of their buyers is actually spreading their collection for free all over the internet. He/she even enter this image in a contest ... omg sigh
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 18:38 by Vonkara »

« Reply #30 on: August 03, 2010, 18:36 »
0
Thanks A LOT click_click, for the advice and for finding that 2nd one (its really huge and definitely not ok!)!
For that first, erm..masterpiece; IF she bought my picture it would be legally ok you think? I'm a bit bothered by the download thing...
I fully agree Vonkara! I'll be contacting them both and that big version better be taken off quickly.
Sometimes it really feels like selling stock equals making your pictures public domain :(

ETA: i see this "doingmediastudies" has a lot of stock pictures posted at the same huge format. Anyone selling pics with books in them better check.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 18:39 by Artemis »

« Reply #31 on: August 03, 2010, 18:42 »
0
Thanks A LOT click_click, for the advice and for finding that 2nd one (its really huge and definitely not ok!)!
For that first, erm..masterpiece; IF she bought my picture it would be legally ok you think? I'm a bit bothered by the download thing...
I fully agree Vonkara! I'll be contacting them both and that big version better be taken off quickly.
Sometimes it really feels like selling stock equals making your pictures public domain :(

ETA: i see this "doingmediastudies" has a lot of stock pictures posted at the same huge format. Anyone selling pics with books in them better check.

First things first: Contact the Flickr member first and ask in a polite manner where they obtained the image.

You can do it two ways. Either you identify yourself as the copyright owner or you act like as if you want the image as well and maybe you get a link where they took your image from.
You may hit two birds with one stone this way.

Once this is settled you know what to do.

« Reply #32 on: August 03, 2010, 19:05 »
0
Indeed i do know what to do now, thanks again! :)
It's done and done as well, written to them both. If the large versions aren't gone within 48 hours im contacting Shutterstock too. (i'd like to give them a chance in case there really was no malicious intent, which i suspect because he credits shutterstock)
Vonkara, to me it looks like he used the pictures to announce a competition, but maybe i'm seeing that wrong...

« Reply #33 on: August 03, 2010, 19:14 »
0
In IS, they say:
Quote
For clarity, you may not use the Content in products for resale, license or other distribution, unless (i) the proposed use is allowable under an Extended License which is available for the Content; or (ii) if the original Content has been fundamentally modified or transformed sufficiently that it constitutes an original work entitling the author or artist to copyright protection under applicable law, and where the primary value of such transformed or derivative work is not recognizable as the Content nor is the Content capable of being downloaded, extracted or accessed by a third party as a stand-alone file (satisfaction of these conditions will constitute the work as a Permitted Derivative Work for the purposes of this Agreement)
I underlined the text above because it is always a question: what is 'fundamentally modified or transformed"? It seems a very subjective matter. The background used in another thread seems a valid usage to me (the original image can not be extracted), but in the examples here I am not so sure.

« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2010, 00:30 »
0
"theblackhauke" just replied to me that she found the image on Bing; she offered to credit me or take the image offline; i'll reply i prefer the last option.
Bing led me to 'the Asbury church' website where there's another huge version of the image ready for take. Mailed them too.
You were right click_click, two birds with one stone :)
Any news on your stolen images click_click? Did you send a DMCA notice?

ETA: they're gone, 1 down 2 to go.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2010, 02:26 by Artemis »

« Reply #35 on: August 04, 2010, 06:40 »
0
"theblackhauke" just replied to me that she found the image on Bing; she offered to credit me or take the image offline; i'll reply i prefer the last option.
Bing led me to 'the Asbury church' website where there's another huge version of the image ready for take. Mailed them too.
You were right click_click, two birds with one stone :)
Any news on your stolen images click_click? Did you send a DMCA notice?

ETA: they're gone, 1 down 2 to go.

Yep, the one on flickr is gone. Nice work!
Love your avatar, by the way!

« Reply #36 on: August 04, 2010, 07:53 »
0
Thank you miss cclapper!  ;D
I just received a message from "doingmediastudies" with an apology saying they didnt realize it was so huge and telling me they took the large version offline. I think they made a mistake though, it's still there, just have to go through one more click. Bugging them again (:

« Reply #37 on: August 04, 2010, 09:19 »
0
I have a question...  I buy images from DT and SS all the time for use on my blog and blogs of my clients.  I never claim copyright on the images because they aren't mine, but anyone can get them off my web site by right-click save or just doing a screen capture (since I buy XS web size).  I haven't been making a habit of adding an attribute to each image used, but I do put links on my "about" page to all of the artists portfolio whose images I've purchased (with my affiliate code, of course :)).

Other than implementing some sort of "right-click" protection, anything else I should be doing?

« Reply #38 on: August 04, 2010, 09:24 »
0
Hello,I readd and all this is scary.I think the person honestly didnot know issue and agreement meaning. What more scary is how many more you did not find.
Maybe this is reason for dip in sales for many as explained here in form.
Soon, if stock agencies not careful, many of our work will be free on cd for sales on ebay or download free torrent like porn movie and movie problem.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #39 on: August 04, 2010, 09:32 »
0
The sad thing is the only ones you know were stolen are the ones tineye has found so far. As time progresses and tineye has crawled more of the web will we all know how huge the problem really has gotten.

« Reply #40 on: August 04, 2010, 09:34 »
0
Soon, if stock agencies not careful, many of our work will be free on cd for sales on ebay or download free torrent like porn movie and movie problem.
That's the case already. But what will they do with it? Music and movies you can enjoy in private, but using an image on the web is a public thing. If people are spreading their images over many agencies, how anybody can prove that it wasn't bought somewhere? The sites won't help you, if you're not exclusive. How could they?

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #41 on: August 04, 2010, 09:42 »
0
Soon, if stock agencies not careful, many of our work will be free on cd for sales on ebay or download free torrent like porn movie and movie problem.
That's the case already. But what will they do with it? Music and movies you can enjoy in private, but using an image on the web is a public thing. If people are spreading their images over many agencies, how anybody can prove that it wasn't bought somewhere? The sites won't help you, if you're not exclusive. How could they?

Every time a buyer posts one of those pictures on their website the next person could come along...right click...save as...and use on the next website waiting for the next person to do the same. Some probably use them for those "2000 stock photos for $1.00" cd's depending on the size. That is a little hard to prevent. No telling how many pictures are floating around out there that this has been the case. If you a designer and photographer and buyer, you know that this isn't right but an average everyday person wouldn't.

« Reply #42 on: August 04, 2010, 09:44 »
0
Hello,I readd and all this is scary.I think the person honestly didnot know issue and agreement meaning. What more scary is how many more you did not find.
Maybe this is reason for dip in sales for many as explained here in form.
Soon, if stock agencies not careful, many of our work will be free on cd for sales on ebay or download free torrent like porn movie and movie problem.

Ten years ago you could get access to every Photodisc etc. on the precursors to torrent sites such as Hotline, and buy them on disc for a couple of dollars.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #43 on: August 04, 2010, 09:45 »
0
About the only way a person could know who actually purchased the photo and who didn't was if the stock sites actually provided details about the buyers, but I doubt that will ever happen.

« Reply #44 on: August 04, 2010, 10:32 »
0
I have a question...  I buy images from DT and SS all the time for use on my blog and blogs of my clients.  I never claim copyright on the images because they aren't mine, but anyone can get them off my web site by right-click save or just doing a screen capture (since I buy XS web size).  I haven't been making a habit of adding an attribute to each image used, but I do put links on my "about" page to all of the artists portfolio whose images I've purchased (with my affiliate code, of course :)).

Other than implementing some sort of "right-click" protection, anything else I should be doing?

Sounds to me like you have it pretty well covered. I can't think of any other way to stop the stealing.

« Reply #45 on: August 04, 2010, 12:17 »
0
Soon, if stock agencies not careful, many of our work will be free on cd for sales on ebay or download free torrent like porn movie and movie problem.
That's the case already. But what will they do with it? Music and movies you can enjoy in private, but using an image on the web is a public thing. If people are spreading their images over many agencies, how anybody can prove that it wasn't bought somewhere? The sites won't help you, if you're not exclusive. How could they?

Every time a buyer posts one of those pictures on their website the next person could come along...right click...save as...and use on the next website waiting for the next person to do the same. Some probably use them for those "2000 stock photos for $1.00" cd's depending on the size. That is a little hard to prevent. No telling how many pictures are floating around out there that this has been the case. If you a designer and photographer and buyer, you know that this isn't right but an average everyday person wouldn't.
True! It's amazing how few people seem aware it's not ok to just right-click, save and use for whatever needed. Today at work i was talking about image theft and they all were genuinely surprised. Turns out they're all 'right-clickers', for their websites, for our center magazine etc (not anymore now ;)). As soon as it's on the net it seems to lose all it's value and becomes 'take what you need'.

« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2010, 12:22 »
0
I hard about a software or image format that expires once a license is not valid anymore.

I think selling RF should be limited to maybe 2 or 3 years as a valid usage period. Who else needs images running for longer campaigns etc.?

I would be totally for this system so that the images are harder to copy.

Of course it will always be possible to make a copy but the harder it is, the fewer infringements will occur... maybe? Maybe not.

« Reply #47 on: August 04, 2010, 12:53 »
0
I hard about a software or image format that expires once a license is not valid anymore.
The moment they invent some embedded license/usage code, two hours later it's cracked and you will have "image cleaners" around. Look what happened to the WMA format and long ago, to the Region Codes in DVD's. The only ones that suffer are the legal buyers.

« Reply #48 on: August 04, 2010, 12:58 »
0
I hard about a software or image format that expires once a license is not valid anymore.
The moment they invent some embedded license/usage code, two hours later it's cracked and you will have "image cleaners" around. Look what happened to the WMA format and long ago, to the Region Codes in DVD's. The only ones that suffer are the legal buyers.

I know what you mean but the regular Joe Does out there who finally understood the concept of right-clicking and saving won't immediately get this system.

It's never 100% fool proof nor will it prevent copyright infringement. I never implied that.

« Reply #49 on: August 04, 2010, 14:48 »
0
...
Any news on your stolen images click_click? Did you send a DMCA notice?
...

Yep, Yahoo just removed the image from Flickr.

All is well.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
New Feature: Image Fight

Started by Istock News Microstock News

13 Replies
3333 Views
Last post March 10, 2007, 04:21
by Bateleur
16 Replies
5990 Views
Last post April 11, 2010, 07:25
by Microbius
29 Replies
7141 Views
Last post June 26, 2012, 00:45
by grafix04
989 Replies
91002 Views
Last post March 18, 2014, 08:32
by KimsCreativeHub
3 Replies
2101 Views
Last post July 30, 2014, 08:46
by ruxpriencdiam

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results