Author Topic: Has anyone purchased images from LO? (Read 22670 times)

madelaide · « **on:** June 17, 2009, 17:23 »

Has anyone purchased images from LO?

I have been finding many copied of a certain image of mine in a watermakred version from LO. I have also been finding many versions of this same image with the same file name as the watermarked one, so I wonder if people really purchased this image (I sold it four times there) or if they removed the watermark.

All these suspicious copies, as well as the watermarked ones, are named
LO-cartoon_sun_gradient_color-50758.jpg

If anyone purchased images in LO, maybe you can help me know if all their files had that name format.

bittersweet · « **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:31 »

I entered the filename in Google (regular search, not image). It returned a lot of results, and the first page has someone allowing downloads of the UNwatermarked version from her Photobucket account.

madelaide · « **Reply #2 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:39 »

I had it removed from Photobucket once. $:-\$

The real problem is not being able to tell legal buyers from illegal ones. That's why I ask for the filename - if the sold image has a different filename code, it becomes evident that the non-watermarked ones are also stolen - and LO idiot watermark was so easy to remove.

MikLav · « **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2009, 17:54 »

Quote from: madelaide on June 17, 2009, 17:23

Has anyone purchased images from LO?

I have been finding many copied of a certain image of mine in a watermakred version from LO. I have also been finding many versions of this same image with the same file name as the watermarked one, so I wonder if people really purchased this image (I sold it four times there) or if they removed the watermark.

All these suspicious copies, as well as the watermarked ones, are named
LO-cartoon_sun_gradient_color-50758.jpg

If anyone purchased images in LO, maybe you can help me know if all their files had that name format.

no, the format was different:
LuckyOliver-373059-blog-to_fly.jpg
LuckyOliver-1134495-medium-clown.jpg

i.e. "LuckyOliver-" + image_id + size + title .jph

madelaide · « **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2009, 18:48 »

Thanks, Miklav. So it seems I have evidence it is the edited watermarked version. Oh well.

madelaide · « **Reply #5 on:** June 17, 2009, 19:08 »

Isn't this annoying? The person uses the edited watermarked image in her blog and ads a copyright notice to it. I want a lawyer!!

http://meerajay.sulekha.com/blog/post/2008/04/birthday-wishes.htm

http://meerajay.sulekha.com/mstore/meerajay/albums/default/LO-cartoon_sun_gradient_color-50758.jpg

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #6 on:** June 17, 2009, 20:45 »

Hey, if you're going to steal something you need to make sure nobody else steals it, right?

null · « **Reply #7 on:** June 17, 2009, 20:55 »

Quote from: madelaide on June 17, 2009, 17:23

Has anyone purchased images from LO?If anyone purchased images in LO, maybe you can help me know if all their files had that name format.

Yes I did, several. The format was for instance : LuckyOliver-915823-blog-paper_gift_tag.jpg

All the EXIF info is there, and in the IPTC, I can see Caption, Keywords, Credits, Origin (with Title = object name).

Pixart · « **Reply #8 on:** June 17, 2009, 21:13 »

Maybe she clipped it from a legit buyer. I mean once a real buyer puts OUR legally purchased unwatermarked photos on THEIR website, its up for grabs for the whole world to right click.... sad but true.

madelaide · « **Reply #9 on:** June 18, 2009, 16:19 »

Pixart,

In many of the instances of the unwatermarked photos, they have the same name as the watermarked one, thus my suspicion. And as Miklav and Flemish showed, the purchased ones have a different format name.

I have found unwatermarked versions of the image that have a different filename, so they can be the legally purchased ones (I have sold it over almost 150 times). Even the two that are at Flickr may have been purchased, although they should not be there.

Void · « **Reply #10 on:** June 18, 2009, 16:33 »

Hi!
I reported it as a copyright violation on the site and referred them to this thread.
:-)

madelaide · « **Reply #11 on:** June 18, 2009, 17:04 »

Void,

Where did you report it? I'm asking DT to take action on this.

null · « **Reply #12 on:** June 19, 2009, 10:46 »

Quote from: madelaide on June 18, 2009, 16:19

In many of the instances of the unwatermarked photos, they have the same name as the watermarked one, thus my suspicion. And as Miklav and Flemish showed, the purchased ones have a different format name.

I remember buying one of the peaches shots of Karin (Karimala) at LO in large size and I guess it had the same format. Not sure since my backups are now 9,000km away. At Pixart: I would never put a large size bought image online at full size. I used that one to crop out banners and graphic elements to keep the same mood and colors. The customer never had the original of Karin. A buyer has no interest in divulging the image he bought: it would only feed his competition.