pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Theft again - please see if your images have been stolen, too.  (Read 19861 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2009, 13:08 »
0
I do not have any physical proof that images have been stolen from Fotolia, not bought.

Elena,
There are three ways to get the image:
1. If you right mouse and 'save as' you get an image 266 x 400 with no metatdata
2. If you download the fotolia comp you get 340 x 512 with no metadata
3 Paid for image is 282 x 425.

The Flickr image is 282 x 425 with full metadata, it is more than a possibility that it is a proper paid for and legal download.

When I purchase images from Istock the metadata has been stripped out, I have no Fotolia downloads to check but could it have come from anywhere else?

David  ???  
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 13:11 by Adeptris »


« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2009, 13:28 »
0
I do not have any physical proof that images have been stolen from Fotolia, not bought.

Elena,
There are three ways to get the image:
1. If you right mouse and 'save as' you get an image 266 x 400 with no metatdata
2. If you download the fotolia comp you get 340 x 512 with no metadata
3 Paid for image is 282 x 425.

The Flickr image is 282 x 425 with full metadata, it is more than a possibility that it is a proper paid for and legal download.

When I purchase images from Istock the metadata has been stripped out, I have no Fotolia downloads to check but could it have come from anywhere else?

David  ???  

Sure, I am agreeing that the images could have been bought, which still doesn't change the fact that they shouldn't be on Flickr under that person's name and made available for free to the general public. How the person got the images is not quite important here, in *any* case the copyright misrepresentation issue, together with RF license violation, is still there. I call it theft because I do believe that presenting someone else's work as your own is theft (as I explained in the previous post).

« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2009, 16:03 »
0
 Hi All,

 I Had a chat with Fotolia and they can't find this photographer in their providers list so I wouldn't point a finger at Fotolia on this one. There advice was to approach Flickr with a DMCA to find out what is going on.

Best,
Jonathan


Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2009, 16:12 »
0

You can also see why this person chose this particular image  - see how Fotolia "watermarks" are just around the model and can be easily removed by simple eraser tool? Both images are exactly the same size.


My point exactly.. the watermark is laughable, especially in isolated shots such as that one.  8)=tom

« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2009, 16:19 »
0
Whether is theft or not, I recently had the same problem - the same image from LuckyOliver in two different Flickr accounts - and they sorted it out quickly.

I think there are people who simply don't know they are doing something wrong. This has been discussed over and over.

And BBC website is still using a watermarked image from StockXpert, which I reported to the latter (and I wonder if they took any action...).

« Reply #30 on: July 31, 2009, 16:29 »
0
Madelaide....  hope I'm not opening another can of worms along with you...

BUT....
I cant help but notice that a few of my pix have shown up on obscure sites with  Lucky Oliver watermarks on them...  Unless this stuff is really old....  They aren't being sold, and my name is credited to the pic 8)=tom
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 16:31 by a.k.a.-tom »

« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2009, 17:01 »
0
Tom,

These are previous discussions about my case.  Maybe one watermarked image was placed in one of the many sites where I found it and other people only copied it.  No credits to me, and in some cases the person claimed copyrights.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/luckyoliver-com/has-anyone-purchased-images-from-lo/
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/is-this-legal-8239/
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 17:03 by madelaide »

LSD72

  • My Bologna has a first name...
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2009, 21:25 »
0
A Friend of mine is not only having his photos stolen...but the friggin idiot is even taken on his Identity. Here is the thread on it.

http://www.photoforum.com/index.php?showtopic=45402&st=0

Dook

« Reply #33 on: August 01, 2009, 04:27 »
0
I don't really understand why someone would pay for the images (or steal them somehow) and then display them on Flickr just like that. What could they possibly stand to gain? Thanx for letting us know, Elenathewise
Some people are doing this since Getty started taking Flickr photos for Getty Flickr collection. Maybe they hope Getty will invite them. But, that is stupid. Sooner or later Getty would find out.

« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2009, 12:48 »
0
Tom,
These are previous discussions about my case.  Maybe one watermarked image was placed in one of the many sites where I found it and other people only copied it.  No credits to me, and in some cases the person claimed copyrights.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/luckyoliver-com/has-anyone-purchased-images-from-lo/
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/is-this-legal-8239/


WOW.... it is really getting out of hand.  My concern is that there are so many LO pix still floating around.  I must admit I do not fully understand all the nuances of the web....   none-the-less....  this trend of ripped off images seems to be on the increase and our protection from our agencies and the supposed legit sites that support these rip off people seems to be on the wane.  8)=tom

« Reply #35 on: August 01, 2009, 14:11 »
0
Hi Dook,

 That is a good point because I am trying to figure out why he would do all that work on such a small file for free. They are only comp size to my knowledge and Getty won't take such a small file to my knowledge, unless they do with their Flicker stuff.

Best,
Jonathan

Dook

« Reply #36 on: August 02, 2009, 16:40 »
0
Jonathan, he can buy a larger file in the case Getty picks it up. This came to my mind because there is a lot of similar activity from the moment Getty introduced Flickr deal.

« Reply #37 on: August 02, 2009, 22:45 »
0
one of mine is in this persons stream of 188 images

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

« Reply #38 on: August 03, 2009, 05:39 »
0

RT


« Reply #39 on: August 03, 2009, 09:57 »
0
Just had a reply from the UK copyright team to inform me the images will be removed from this Flickr account within 24hrs. Don't know if they mean all of them or just mine.

RT


« Reply #40 on: August 04, 2009, 05:01 »
0
True to their word my images have now been taken off this persons Flickr account, however others still remain.

« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2009, 14:37 »
0
I guess Flickr UK legal team is much more efficient than North America's. Still waiting for a reply on my report. Tried to contact them through a website, some moron keeps sending the same reply over and over again (just copying and pasting from somewhere) - about having to contact Yahoo!'s legal team. Which didn't respond yet.....

RT


« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2009, 14:58 »
0
Elena,

I didn't go through Flickr, I went straight to Yahoo, but yes I agree the red tape that the US have created for themselves over copyright does seem to delay things for those that live in the US.

Moonb007

  • Architect, Photographer, Dreamer
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2009, 15:00 »
0
How do you guys even find you images on flickr sense most the time the images are stripped of keywords?

I would also contact Yahoo directly sense they own the Flickr

« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2009, 15:58 »
0
Moonb, I found mine in searches (Google, TinEye, Bing), even if not directly.  One image was at MySpace, linked to Flickr.

HerrMursilgo

  • achdulibertzeit eine Ratte mit Flgeln
« Reply #45 on: August 05, 2009, 16:34 »
0
Elena,

I didn't go through Flickr, I went straight to Yahoo, but yes I agree the red tape that the US have created for themselves over copyright does seem to delay things for those that live in the US.

USA don't give squat for anything . They have more crooks in USA that are running around free. I don't expect too much change to come for stolen images on the internet. They don't even solve serious crimes, so I am sure stolen microstock images are far from their Important Crimes to Solve Listing.
 ;)

If the Big 6 don't do nothing. Why anyone else must do it?

« Reply #46 on: August 05, 2009, 22:30 »
0
Elena,

I didn't go through Flickr, I went straight to Yahoo, but yes I agree the red tape that the US have created for themselves over copyright does seem to delay things for those that live in the US.

USA don't give squat for anything . They have more crooks in USA that are running around free. I don't expect too much change to come for stolen images on the internet. They don't even solve serious crimes, so I am sure stolen microstock images are far from their Important Crimes to Solve Listing.
 ;)

If the Big 6 don't do nothing. Why anyone else must do it?

I agree re big 6.  Istock say dont post on forum send it to their specific team who *to my knowledge* (correct me if I'm wrong) dont do anything if they are not exclusive images because they cannot be sure of where they have come from. 

Even when a site find peoples trying to sell stolen images all they do is delete the account, it's not a real big deterrent. 

« Reply #47 on: August 06, 2009, 20:18 »
0
Flickr had always worried me about usage. Although they have the creative collective, etc option.
The problem is many people share their images unknowingly on flickr.
I can't remember the name for this photo sharing option, but I am sure some of you know what I mean. It's when someone invites you to add your photo to their group or something.
EVentually, it could end up on a cd or whatever. And nobody is the wiser.

Still , the fault is on sites like Flickr,etc.. not to make awareness of the importance of image ownership.
Hell, I've seen flickr images being used in Yahoo weather and I even wonder if that is with the Flickr member aware of it. And do they pay that member for the use of their photos in Yahoo weather? I am not sure.

Check it out if ever you have the time . I think it's simply called Yahoo weather,
and it has tons of Flickr images from every states and country.


« Reply #48 on: August 06, 2009, 22:57 »
0
Interesting article relating to managing your copyright:

http://www.johnlund.com/2009/07/crowd-sourcing-crowd-enforcing.html

« Reply #49 on: August 06, 2009, 23:12 »
0
Interesting article relating to managing your copyright:

http://www.johnlund.com/2009/07/crowd-sourcing-crowd-enforcing.html


that sounds wonderful. and yes, too good to be true.
25 bucks is pretty insignificant for so much protection.
too insignificant like a money grab by the society like gun registry
which claims to protect the innocent, but instead does nothing to stop
the criminal who possess the unregistered firearms.

the protection is no more iron-clad than vapour ware that promises us new softwares each year.
but it does not promise us anything about how they are going to punish the criminals
and those who steal our copyright images , or manipulate our photographs into vectors and other
non-photographic images.

unless there is something specific about PUNISHMENT to the thief of copyright materials ie our photographs,  spending 25 bucks is no different than throwing it away.

In North America, or at least Canada, I think...
the ownership does not need to be registered. The copyright begins the moment an artist
creates the work. No fees or registration is needed. It becomes copyright material.

So anything else is just a money grab. 25 bucks multiply by how many thousands of photographers
is one heck of a money grab.
Equally similar to micro stock promises every newbie with a DSLR that he too could earn 135 K per annum.

Back to the old sickening but true saying NATO...
No Action Talk Only.

I do not condone with theft. I value another person's image as much as I do mine.
And I am also looking forward to something with teeth to deter our images from being stolen.
But it has to begin with the stock agencies that distribute our images.
If they don't care to do anything, it's really a waste of time.
Simply because this is where they got our images from.

We know how much the agencies CARE FOR THE BUYERS...
but it is still a long way from any of the Big 6 agencies showing any signs of
CARE FOR THE CONTRIBUTORS.




 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
5469 Views
Last post August 04, 2008, 13:25
by pelmof
48 Replies
32872 Views
Last post February 22, 2016, 01:23
by heartsnatcher
1 Replies
5078 Views
Last post January 10, 2010, 19:19
by madelaide
24 Replies
4324 Views
Last post January 15, 2014, 15:40
by Marburg
4 Replies
2478 Views
Last post January 24, 2015, 09:30
by aaron007

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle