MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stolen Images or Infringement of Exclusivity?  (Read 5719 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2014, 06:29 »
+1
This looks like "inspiration" as opposed to same person. Dny59 is a huge player on Istock and has been for a long time. While I don't know him/her/them I doubt they would take derivatives and try to buck the odds. These aren't stolen either. They are clearly different images.

This is why contributors need uniqueness, images that are hard to copy. Things like you have posted are fairly easy to do, but their marketability is high, took that's why they get copied.

« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2014, 06:29 »
0
Only inspiration ...

« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2014, 06:40 »
+3
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2014, 06:44 »
0
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.
MegaPixel has only been on SS since 2013; which proves nothing, but might be slightly suspicious. Why not post on the SS thread?

« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2014, 06:54 »
+2
MegaPixel's portfolio has been removed lately from iStock.
It is still there on Thinkstock though:
http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/2/image?artist=Mega_Pixel

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2014, 09:00 »
+2
MegaPixel's portfolio has been removed lately from iStock.
It is still there on Thinkstock though:
http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/2/image?artist=Mega_Pixel

Yeah, it can take a while to get things on - or off - TS.

BTW, if you knew MP's port had been removed from iS, there wasn't any question of 'infringement of exclusivity'.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 09:16 by ShadySue »

« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2014, 10:10 »
0
This one should be harder to copy:
http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/golden-retriever-dog-with-sombrero-and-maraca-15902932?st=e1fe47f
Although I recognize the sombrero from Oriental Trading Company - where every Mom I know would order party favors - so no surprise it shows up a lot. Nothing like a sombrero made in China to say Cinco de Mayo  It's truly a small world 8)
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 10:15 by wordplanet »

« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2014, 10:33 »
0
Seems to me all inspirations from an idea..
The products themselves are very generic, like the pumpkin....


« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2014, 10:41 »
-2
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

So what?  You can only copyright the execution of a concept, not the concept itself.  And exclusivity constrains the creator of the content, not anyone else who might find inspiration from it.  These concepts are so generic and the executions different enough that I don't see a problem.

« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2014, 10:45 »
+2
MegaPixel's portfolio has been removed lately from iStock.
It is still there on Thinkstock though:
http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/2/image?artist=Mega_Pixel

Yeah, it can take a while to get things on - or off - TS.
BTW, if you knew MP's port had been removed from iS, there wasn't any question of 'infringement of exclusivity'.


Not necessarily.... there could be lots of different possible explanations of this phenomenon, but the facts remain the same:
On 2013 someone started to upload series of images very similar to another particular existing exclusive portfolio.
Actually, every single image he/she uploaded appears to be very similar to the same IS exclusive portfolio both in terms of style, objects and post-processing technics.
On 2014 all these images suddenly disappeared from iStock.
But he/she continued to upload this stuff to all other agencies.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2014, 10:58 »
0
There could be many explanations, but it looks like the most likely is that iS deemed MP's work to be too close to the other, and closed their port. But as others said, they are simple, isolated objects, so perhaps the 'inspiration' isn't strong enough to make a case for the other agencies to take them down.

« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2014, 08:38 »
+3
Weird.
These ports are so similar as they were made by the same person.
I think you should submit a request to SS to remove this content.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2014, 15:19 by Karen »

« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2014, 10:33 »
0

« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2014, 10:48 »
+3
Weird.
These ports are so similar as they were made by the same person.
Could be another Yuri's style special deal.

Or it could be just one person copying images from a successful portfolio.

« Reply #15 on: July 20, 2014, 11:28 »
+11

"These ports are so similar as they were made by the same person.
Could be another Yuri's style special deal."

You can concoct conspiracies all day long, but I can absolutely guarantee you that this is not the case.

« Reply #16 on: July 20, 2014, 13:47 »
+5

"These ports are so similar as they were made by the same person.
Could be another Yuri's style special deal."

You can concoct conspiracies all day long, but I can absolutely guarantee you that this is not the case.

It's very depressing that you even have to respond to that kind of nasty and irresponsible trolling given your 100% credibility over many years. Though I can completely understand you wanting to respond.

« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2014, 15:20 »
+4

"These ports are so similar as they were made by the same person.
Could be another Yuri's style special deal."

You can concoct conspiracies all day long, but I can absolutely guarantee you that this is not the case.
I sincerely apologies for my irresponsible comment. I removed it from my post.
I think you should submit a request to SS to remove this content.

« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2014, 17:02 »
+3
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

So what?  You can only copyright the execution of a concept, not the concept itself.  And exclusivity constrains the creator of the content, not anyone else who might find inspiration from it.  These concepts are so generic and the executions different enough that I don't see a problem.

It can be as legal as you want (if it really is), but morally is dirty and low.

« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2014, 17:11 »
-3
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

So what?  You can only copyright the execution of a concept, not the concept itself.  And exclusivity constrains the creator of the content, not anyone else who might find inspiration from it.  These concepts are so generic and the executions different enough that I don't see a problem.

It can be as legal as you want (if it really is), but morally is dirty and low.

You have a weird sense of morality, and one I give no weight at all.  Being first doesn't give you any special rights to an idea, any more than shouting FIRST gives your opinion primacy on a comment thread.  But enjoy your moral high ground, while I ignore you in favor of less self-important proclamations.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #20 on: July 20, 2014, 17:12 »
+1
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

So what?  You can only copyright the execution of a concept, not the concept itself.  And exclusivity constrains the creator of the content, not anyone else who might find inspiration from it.  These concepts are so generic and the executions different enough that I don't see a problem.

It can be as legal as you want (if it really is), but morally is dirty and low.
I think you'll find there are few, if any, micros who would regard 'low morals' as an issue.

« Reply #21 on: July 20, 2014, 17:38 »
+1
Every single image on this SS portfolio looks like "inspired" from the same IS exclusive portfolio.

So what?  You can only copyright the execution of a concept, not the concept itself.  And exclusivity constrains the creator of the content, not anyone else who might find inspiration from it.  These concepts are so generic and the executions different enough that I don't see a problem.

It can be as legal as you want (if it really is), but morally is dirty and low.

You have a weird sense of morality, and one I give no weight at all.  Being first doesn't give you any special rights to an idea, any more than shouting FIRST gives your opinion primacy on a comment thread.  But enjoy your moral high ground, while I ignore you in favor of less self-important proclamations.

What you say, tells a lot about you. As a person, and as a stock photographer (for  you doesn't seem able to tell that is something more --much more-- than the naked idea).

« Reply #22 on: July 20, 2014, 19:06 »
+1
Only someone who never had an original idea would not understand why it is wrong to steal someone elses idea much less much of their portfolio.

« Reply #23 on: July 20, 2014, 19:50 »
-3
"Good artists copy, but great artists steal." - Pablo Picasso

« Reply #24 on: July 20, 2014, 22:10 »
+1
"Good artists copy, but great artists steal." - Pablo Picasso

So which one do you imagine you are?



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
44 Replies
18831 Views
Last post January 21, 2010, 18:49
by loop
4 Replies
1533 Views
Last post January 31, 2013, 12:30
by RacePhoto
39 Replies
12138 Views
Last post January 29, 2015, 12:16
by Uncle Pete
19 Replies
5558 Views
Last post July 24, 2017, 08:12
by MxR
3 Replies
1419 Views
Last post June 30, 2021, 10:54
by MotionJunky

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle