If you had a watermark in my images on your site, I would be perfectly fine with that.

Quote from: SuperPhoto on March 30, 2018, 09:15

lol, don't worry about it.

a) It's probably a placeholder. ANY professional (real) site would not get business if they had 'shutterstock' all watermarked over it.
b) If they ARE a real site trying to get busienss, they probably don't have the money anyways to pay for it - and it is advertising for you.
c) Also - asfaik, they aren't "stolen" either. Pretty much every stock site lets you download preview/watermarked images/video/etc.

a) don't know if it's a placeholder, doesn't matter, illegal use
b) No it's not advertising, it's stealing
c) Wrong, downloading a sample and using it are far different.

Can I have some of your best images to use on my website? I promise to mention your name if I ever make some money. Sorry can't afford to pay but you'll get exposure, views, and maybe credit. 

I'm trying to say though - unless the site to the end user explicitly states "preview images may not be used on websites" (which I have not seen from the license agreements I've reviewed), there's not really any enforceability. And even if that was written - it doesn't necessarily mean that it is enforceable, simply because there is the understanding that a preview is an 'evaluation' (incentive to get someone to purchase the full version). As for DMCA notices, it is supposed to apply to full copyrighted content.

It's like say having a bag of cookies for sale in costco, and getting mad at costco because they are giving out free samples to 'non-paying' customers. Sure, some will never have an intention of buying that brand of cookies whatsoever. But others, they think, mm these are good cookies, and then buy them, maybe even buy a few and tell some friends.

I guess to each his own. If you want to get upset because someone is using watermarked content on their site, then go ahead and get upset and chase after every single person doing that. I feel time would be better spent creating new content and looking for paying customers, but - it's your choice.

Lol yeah... Okay. And your point?

It doesn't explicitly say the materials "cannot be used on websites". And for the site in question - they could simply argue it is preview/evaluation site. Companies actually do create mock up sites not intended for public use (but due to the nature of the internet, can be indexed in search engines and be discovered). Secondly, since a user can easily download the *preview* images without actually accepting the license agreement (you don't need to create an account in order to have access to those images), those 'rules' created by shutterstock are not technically enforceable under that license agreement.

Anyways, some people are going to believe what they want to believe, no matter what is presented to them. If someone wants to waste their energy getting all worked up on this, I guess that is their choice. I guess you can't see that, and can't see the bigger picture, so I am not going to discuss this any more. Go ahead and chase after people using preview images if you want.

Quote from: SuperPhoto on April 03, 2018, 09:15

I'm trying to say though - unless the site to the end user explicitly states "preview images may not be used on websites" (which I have not seen from the license agreements I've reviewed), there's not really any enforceability.

Here's what I found after 3 seconds spent searching, it's for Shutterstock footage:

"A FOOTAGE COMP LICENSE grants you the right to use watermarked, low resolution Footage as a comp (the "Comp Footage") solely in test, sample, comp, or rough cut evaluation materials. Footage Comp Licenses do not permit you to display or distribute to the public or incorporated into any final materials any such Footage. Comp Footage can be edited, but you may not remove or alter the Shutterstock watermark."

I mean, OF COURSE previews are not allowed in final materials. It's just so obvious I can't even believe you question it.

I'm trying to say though - unless the site to the end user explicitly states "preview images may not be used on websites" (which I have not seen from the license agreements I've reviewed), there's not really any enforceability. And even if that was written - it doesn't necessarily mean that it is enforceable, simply because there is the understanding that a preview is an 'evaluation' (incentive to get someone to purchase the full version). As for DMCA notices, it is supposed to apply to full copyrighted content.

It's like say having a bag of cookies for sale in costco, and getting mad at costco because they are giving out free samples to 'non-paying' customers. Sure, some will never have an intention of buying that brand of cookies whatsoever. But others, they think, mm these are good cookies, and then buy them, maybe even buy a few and tell some friends.

I guess to each his own. If you want to get upset because someone is using watermarked content on their site, then go ahead and get upset and chase after every single person doing that. I feel time would be better spent creating new content and looking for paying customers, but - it's your choice.

Now that you've given your permission to use your watermarked images, tell us who you are so we can use them.

Pretty sure that about 60% images on the web are stolen.

SuperPhoto, I'm going to give you the benefit of a very small doubt, and suppose you are thinking the images are hotlinked.

There is one instance where I don't mind if someone uses my images without buying them, and that is hotlinking to the thumbnail in a forum.  If they are not using it to make money, but just trying to illustrate their comment, that use is a sort of advertising.  The hotlink will give someone a way to find the site I am selling the image on, if they want to buy it.

Otherwise, thieves can die in a fire.

It's like say having a bag of cookies for sale in costco, and getting mad at costco because they are giving out free samples to 'non-paying' customers. Sure, some will never have an intention of buying that brand of cookies whatsoever. But others, they think, mm these are good cookies, and then buy them, maybe even buy a few and tell some friends.

More often than not that's a vendor of the product. But, since Microstock is Costco ... snag me up half a pallet of marijuana pictures.

Quote from: SuperPhoto on April 03, 2018, 09:15

I'm trying to say though - unless the site to the end user explicitly states "preview images may not be used on websites" (which I have not seen from the license agreements I've reviewed), there's not really any enforceability. And even if that was written - it doesn't necessarily mean that it is enforceable, simply because there is the understanding that a preview is an 'evaluation' (incentive to get someone to purchase the full version). As for DMCA notices, it is supposed to apply to full copyrighted content.

It's like say having a bag of cookies for sale in costco, and getting mad at costco because they are giving out free samples to 'non-paying' customers. Sure, some will never have an intention of buying that brand of cookies whatsoever. But others, they think, mm these are good cookies, and then buy them, maybe even buy a few and tell some friends.

I guess to each his own. If you want to get upset because someone is using watermarked content on their site, then go ahead and get upset and chase after every single person doing that. I feel time would be better spent creating new content and looking for paying customers, but - it's your choice.

Now that you've given your permission to use your watermarked images, tell us who you are so we can use them.

This!

Quote from: Uncle Pete on April 04, 2018, 13:55

I pay for the hosting and the bandwidth has limits. I don't like it when someone steals my paid bandwidth for their cheap site or for a blog. I don't believe you should either.

Oh, but it's so much fun to switch pictures on them when they do that.

There are "free coloring pages" sites that regularly hotlink to the thumbnails on unseengallery.com.  When they do, I redirect my page to a duplicate, and replace the image they're linking to with lemonparty or tubgirl.

LOL Bahahah. That's the best idea I've ever heard.

I'm scared to google those to find out what they are.

I made that mistake. I didn't see the images, but the descriptions were bad enough.

Cease and desist or PAY for your work.  Would you not pay them for their work? Would they work for you without their pay?