MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Zymmetrical User stole my images  (Read 12330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 05, 2009, 18:24 »
0
Hello,

a user on zymmetrical has stolen two of my images, please check his profile if he stole some of your images too.
http://www.zymmetrical.com/artists/artist-profile/uid/53184/
 I am not sure but i think he downloaded them from flickr and upsized them. I dont think he bought them to upload them for himself, but who knows...

theese are the images:
http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-nature-animals/fileid/zyimgnaa25698/
http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-nature-animals/fileid/zyimgnaa17855/

I emailed zymmetrical about this.

What else can i do, can somebody help me, please?


« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2009, 18:58 »
0
IT has happened before that pictures from different contributors get mixed up at Zymmetrical. I found two images that were not mine in my portfolio and they even had keywords of my images.
Zymmetrical has a very good customer service, I'm sure they will help you with this.

« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2009, 19:01 »
0
What else can i do, can somebody help me, please?

Since he has 125,000 images in his port, I guess it's a glitch in the database. It happened before: I had shots of somebody else in my port. It was solved. You will get a reply and an explanation soon. Zym is very responsive.

« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2009, 19:04 »
0
What else can i do, can somebody help me, please?

Since he has 125,000 images in his port, I guess it's a glitch in the database. It happened before: I had shots of somebody else in my port. It was solved. You will get a reply and an explanation soon. Zym is very responsive.

Either that or he/she is an extremely talented photographer able to master a tremendous variety of styles. ;)

« Reply #4 on: March 05, 2009, 19:12 »
0
All I can say is,
this guy has so many totally different images and so many different models...

« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2009, 20:15 »
0
just to let you know, we are aware of the issue and keith is on it ( he has been really sick the last few days). Update very soon.

Best


« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2009, 20:59 »
0
he has been really sick the last few days

Wish him the best.

digiology

« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2009, 21:34 »
0
just to let you know, we are aware of the issue and keith is on it ( he has been really sick the last few days). Update very soon.

Best



If he has the awful flu currently spreading throughout Vancouver then I totally feel for him. It's brutal.  :(  Hope he feels better soon!

« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2009, 03:00 »
0
My guess is Yuri wouldn't be so happy finding his images in lynx's portfolio...  ;D

http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-people/fileid/zyimgppp28366/

Patrick H.

« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2009, 03:14 »
0
125,000 images he could start his own stocksite.
I'm sure it must be a glitch, nobody could load that many photos, how many does yuri have  with his team to do the work.


zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #10 on: March 06, 2009, 03:20 »
0
Guys we are a distribution partner with Panthermedia.net.  That's all - if you find your images under the Lynx name it means you're getting paid through them. 

On MSG there seems to be at least one thread a week 'my images on some site I did not sign up with' regarding different agencies: if you sign up to Panthermedia, Fotolia, etc. where you have opted-in to various Partnership/Distribution agreements, please -check with that agency first- as to what the scoop is.

Stolen images on Zymmetrical would be very difficult to get by since our Reviewers know and see all, never mind the technical steps we take.

« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2009, 03:26 »
0
Ahh, thats why my penguins are on your site.  So what happens if I choose to  upload to your site as well, will you delete my image from panthermedia?

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2009, 03:38 »
0
We would go per artist request - your choice, however re-uploading, re-reviewing, re-processing is a time consuming thing.. if you're happy with Panther you may be better off sticking with them and let us do our distribution thing.

Note - we will be adding their new web size price format as an option soon which will add some more movement on the lower price brackets.

« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2009, 03:59 »
0
Guys we are a distribution partner with Panthermedia.net.  That's all - if you find your images under the Lynx name it means you're getting paid through them. 

On MSG there seems to be at least one thread a week 'my images on some site I did not sign up with' regarding different agencies: if you sign up to Panthermedia, Fotolia, etc. where you have opted-in to various Partnership/Distribution agreements, please -check with that agency first- as to what the scoop is.

Stolen images on Zymmetrical would be very difficult to get by since our Reviewers know and see all, never mind the technical steps we take.

At least now i understand, thanks for the quick response and sorry for another one of thees "images stolen" threads.

Maybe you can find a way to inform the photograhpers about that. Image theft is a big issue in theese days and every photographer who will find his own images in an agency under a different username will be upset and think his images are stolen.

Now that i now this, it is no problem for me.

By the way i like Zymmetrical very much, it is one of the most interesting agencies. I will keep on uploading and hope that sales will come up one day.

One question that still remains for me is, what happens if i upload images to zymmetrical that are distributed over partners?

Thank you!
 

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2009, 04:25 »
0
Thanks :)  You are right perhaps it could be integrated for more clarity- but opting in to distribution channels means gaining more revenue with perhaps less oversight. As long as you have faith in the agencies involved (Panther is a fantastic agency) there should be no worries.   

It's a good question about directly uploading, if you are already opted in to Panther distribution- of course we'd love anyone to work with us directly too, and you'd like to upload some to us, just send our support a note and we will confirm your identity and get you a list of any existing photos so there's no duplication.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2009, 04:27 by zymmetrical »

« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2009, 05:20 »
0
It's a good question about directly uploading, if you are already opted in to Panther distribution- of course we'd love anyone to work with us directly too, and you'd like to upload some to us, just send our support a note and we will confirm your identity and get you a list of any existing photos so there's no duplication.

Does it work the other way round too? That is, Panther distributes Zym's images? I heard here that Panther's upload process is very tedious so I never bothered. Panther might distribute Zym's images of those contributors that aren't on Panther...

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2009, 05:28 »
0
No, no API on our side yet.   Just some XML to code but most importantly a major business project - maybe in time.


« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2009, 11:54 »
0
The thing that really, really troubles me about these partnerships (It's not just this PM one, it's also JI subs for example) is the fact the copyright holder is not given any form of credit.  It's just not right.  Jan Will's penguins will appear in a magazine with a credit line something like "Photo by Lynx" or "(c) Zymmetrical".   Agencies are our distributors, not the owners of the content.

« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2009, 12:08 »
0
The thing that really, really troubles me about these partnerships (It's not just this PM one, it's also JI subs for example) is the fact the copyright holder is not given any form of credit.  It's just not right.  Jan Will's penguins will appear in a magazine with a credit line something like "Photo by Lynx" or "(c) Zymmetrical".   Agencies are our distributors, not the owners of the content.
Unfortunately that happens even without partnership - quite often photos are credited "istockphoto" or "fotolia" or whatever agency and not the photographer. That's part of microstock licensing scheme - the publishers don't have to provide the credit to photographer...

« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2009, 13:26 »
0
Yes, it is unfortunate.  But "I don't have to" and "I would love to credit the photographer but I have no idea who they are" are two different things.

« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2009, 16:54 »
0
Let me see if I understand it.  If I had images in Panther (I don't) and they were being sold in Zymm, my name would not appear in Zymm as the author, but "Lynx" instead?   :-\

« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2009, 17:22 »
0
And for what I understand, we are talking about agencies, not artists.  Here, Lynx is identified as an artist, who did all the photos in his portfolio.

Obviously that is not the case.  So why don't you identify clearly Lynx as a re-distributor or anything else but NOT as the photographer who did the photos?

Claude

Edited to add: Photos from Lynx's portfolio (at least the ones that I checked) are copyrighted by Lynx.  That is not the case , am I right?
« Last Edit: March 06, 2009, 17:45 by le_cyclope »

RacePhoto

« Reply #22 on: March 06, 2009, 18:55 »
0
How does something like this one come up for "elephant" ?



Quote
High-resolution Royalty-free .JPG stock photo
Emotional White III
 Copyright : Lynx

   working elephant |  Asian |  dichhaeuter |  dichhuter |  thick skin |  elefranteus |  plodder |  tourist swing |  animal | 

 :o :-* ???

This might be why IS will take over the world of stock. CV



Photos 26, 46, 48, in search for Green Apple. Not to ignore all the rest that are red apples with a green leaf or something else green. Vague keywords, stretches of what's really the subject of a photo and outright keyword spam isn't dead, it's just killing stock photography.

For a laugh try "race car", where two of the first 15 images are photos of cats, four have no car in them. Three are women smiling, one with a dog. People sitting at a table...

Before you think I've gone mad, set the number if images to 160 per page, because Page one comes up last in the ZYM search. If someone searches for only 20 images, the best match comes up. As you search for more images, the lower matching photos, show on the top of the page, which is a little bit crazy?

A little bit crazy? Try automobile looking at the top 40 matches.



I wish you the best Zymmetrical (with two M's, don't anyone try the site with one M where you can find a poop frame) but you need to sort out your search engine.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2009, 19:47 by RacePhoto »

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #23 on: March 07, 2009, 09:35 »
0
@Lorraine- I am in full agreement about the artist credit however in this case it's a tradeoff of exposure and new marketing channels vs some anonymity. The artist credit is given on the downloads page after purchase. Since we are not legally able to create an 'account' on behalf of each photographer in the distributorship (someone has to sign up and agree personally to have an account), the artist name is a piece of the metadata. As far as our agreements go we are simply abiding by the terms of their opt-in distribution channel.     

@Maria - That is correct, with the caveat noted in the first point. Note we do not distribute images from existing Zymm members to avoid overlaps, so you can upload to Panthermedia and even opt-in to their distibution program and it won't conflict with your existing account with us.

@Racephoto - We are adding a couple new languages and rebuilding the search indexes over the weekend, you may have experienced the strange results on account of that.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 09:43 by zymmetrical »

« Reply #24 on: March 07, 2009, 11:17 »
0
@Racephoto - We are adding a couple new languages and rebuilding the search indexes over the weekend, you may have experienced the strange results on account of that.


A - No search engine will help if there is a keyword-spammer in the house. Some are very notorious at it. Will there be an option soon to flag an image for bad keywords?

B - I found this and this and this and this (position #11!) under "medical, doctor", and that was only the first page. Also a lot of isolated stethoscopes with no persons. The first real doctors only show up later in the page. Sorry, but "doctor" is a person.

This one is on position #2 for "doctor,medical", an underexposed snapshot of a disposable syringe. Pardon me, but if I were a customer looking for "doctors" (person) I would be turned off by the abundance of irrelevant images on the first page.

As a comparison, I did a quick check on DT for the same search terms and the first 7 pages came up with real doctors.  Istock was (as usual) slightly worse with just 3 irrelevant images in the top 60, and SS had 4 in the first 60.

C - By coincidence, I just checked a few on top but they are all from Lynx. Also the "spam" examples are from Lynx. So Zymm seems to privilege Panther's contributors, rather than its own. Don't forget the secret to sales is position as result of the search engine, not image quality. The obvious conclusion would be not to upload to Zymm but to Panther, since you'll get (a) a better position in the search engine and (b) you can sell at both sites with the same upload effort.  :o
(Incidentally, the same argument for uploading to Fotolia only and not to Pixmac).
« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 11:45 by FlemishDreams »

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #25 on: March 07, 2009, 11:56 »
0
Those examples are quite clearly the wrong keywords for the image, specific to a fraction of the Lynx ones only - as mentioned the whole index is being rebuilt, should be back to normal shortly, ranking could be affected until it's settled.   

Our Reviewers a great job to keeping spam keywords out, and we don't plan to reinstate the post-approval keyword changing tool for artists as it is simply too expensive to have to pay people to review changes of keywords, which should be done right from the start.

And for the record, I don't see the problem of a stethoscope with a keyword 'doctor' - it is in the the theme. If i'm making a brochure design for a doctor I would certainly consider a stethoscope as a relevant result for 'doctor'.
 
« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 12:05 by zymmetrical »

« Reply #26 on: March 07, 2009, 12:14 »
0
Those examples are quite clearly the wrong keywords for the image, specific to a fraction of the Lynx ones only - as mentioned the whole index is being rebuilt, should be back to normal shortly, ranking could be affected until it's settled.

Perhaps it was a coincidence and of course it's only one sample but I saw more. Let's wait then till the engine is fixed.

And for the record, I don't see the problem of a stethoscope with a keyword 'doctor' - it is in the the theme. If i'm making a brochure design for a doctor I would certainly consider a stethoscope as a relevant result for 'doctor'.

I beg to differ, and it's not the established procedure any more in the mainstream microstock sites. Even SS starts to reject for slightly off-subject keywords. If I have to make a brochure and I want a doctor, I look for "doctor", not for "stethoscope". Of course, many doctors will have stethoscopes since it's one of the props of their trade. If I want a stethoscope, I'll look for "stethoscope".

If there is no person at all in the shot, one shouldn't add "doctor" to the keywords. Ellen Boughns wrote a few great tutorials about this, ie adding "possible use" that is not visible in the shot. It's good to know that Zymm is very relaxed on keywords. I'll add "romance, beachwalk, global warming" to sunset photos too then  :P

RacePhoto

« Reply #27 on: March 07, 2009, 13:04 »
0
Those examples are quite clearly the wrong keywords for the image, specific to a fraction of the Lynx ones only - as mentioned the whole index is being rebuilt, should be back to normal shortly, ranking could be affected until it's settled.   

Our Reviewers a great job to keeping spam keywords out, and we don't plan to reinstate the post-approval keyword changing tool for artists as it is simply too expensive to have to pay people to review changes of keywords, which should be done right from the start.

And for the record, I don't see the problem of a stethoscope with a keyword 'doctor' - it is in the the theme. If i'm making a brochure design for a doctor I would certainly consider a stethoscope as a relevant result for 'doctor'.
 


It happens everywhere and yes, it seems that the majority are coming from Lynx for some odd reason. Maybe it's a robot translator.

Without beating you about the head over the usual inaccuracies in keywords. The first three with the girl, all have automobile in the keywords, and there is an auto somewhere in the image.  ;D The problem is that if someone does a search for 20 images, they get better matches, when it goes up to 40 or 80, Zymmetrical puts the LAST pages first, so lower matches are showing at the top of the search page, best matches show at the bottom. Strange?

I wasn't just complaining for the sake of causing trouble. If you have less images now, and you tighten the limits to start with, it's not going to be as hard to get the site under control as if you wait for a year and 1 million more images later to edit.

No stethoscope isn't a doctor, just like a pipe wrench isn't a plumber. A road sign showing a moose crossing isn't an automobile, and neither is a stretch or highway with no cars on it. How many buyers will get frustrated from too many vague matches and implied connections and go to iStock or Veer where CV is reigning in a runaway proliferation of mismatched key words. I suppose a poor selection of search words will produce poor results, (as in my example of one word "automobile) it's going to happen, but a front end loader, kid on a bicycle, tire and fuel gauge are not automobiles.   :)



One way to get free help is add an option to, flag an image for bad keywords? Now you don't have to have someone going through all the images looking for obvious errors like a lady elephant where someone may have just bulk edited their keywords by accident.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 13:24 by RacePhoto »

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #28 on: March 07, 2009, 13:53 »
0
I'd like to continue this thread here http://www.microstockgroup.com/zymmetrical-com/keywords-ranking/msg87152/?topicseen#new if you don't mind, as the original issue was answered and also i'm going to have nightmares about 'Zymmetrical users stealing images' if this one keeps up.  :P
« Last Edit: March 07, 2009, 14:05 by zymmetrical »

RacePhoto

« Reply #29 on: March 07, 2009, 14:12 »
0
I'd like to continue this thread here http://www.microstockgroup.com/zymmetrical-com/keywords-ranking/msg87152/?topicseen#new if you don't mind, as the original issue was answered and also i'm going to have nightmares about 'Zymmetrical users stealing images' if this one keeps up.  :P


Sorry, and if it wasn't clear because the thread got hijacked, the images are not stolen, they are licensed from an affiliate agency.

« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2009, 19:25 »
0
Before closing this thread, I'd like to point out that when some artist (here Lynx) tells everybody that he owns copyright of photos when he does not, to me it is very close to a thievery.

One way of avoiding this situation might be to show a generic mention like Copyright by Various Artists or something like this (I'm not a lawyer...).

Zymmetrical, I'd like to have your point of view on this...

Claude

« Reply #31 on: March 07, 2009, 19:30 »
0
One way of avoiding this situation might be to show a generic mention like Copyright by Various Artists or something like this (I'm not a lawyer...).

What if somebody registers with the name Lynx?  :P
Well Zymm could have it called user "Panthermedia". Using "Lynx" as a nick seems like a deception and we always find out sooner or later  ;D
Two years ago, BigStock pulled a similar trick with affiliates, where the shots were sold 20x the price. It started like a "theft" thread but then they had to become clear on the affiliate.

« Reply #32 on: March 07, 2009, 19:41 »
0
One way of avoiding this situation might be to show a generic mention like Copyright by Various Artists or something like this (I'm not a lawyer...).

What if somebody registers with the name Lynx?  :P

Or with Various Artists ?   :D

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #33 on: March 08, 2009, 13:36 »
0
Let's put it this way: you can register as username 'xyz123' with our business (or many other stock agencies), and that is the name the copyright is attributed to on the public facing pages. It is an arbitrary, non-legal name attribute that is connected to your real identity. We provide additional optional profile options to be able to display your 'real name' on your profile page etc. should you choose to be reveal more info.  We, as the agent licensing the content, know who the copyright holder is, and you (the creator of the material) know who the copyright holder is - you. 

We are not brokering copyright we are licensing images.  Goods are sold in all kinds of marketplaces under 'white labels' or various marks other than the direct 'original manufacturer' name.

For example, 'iofoto' is a name featured in the 'copyright' section of photo pages on many agencies. Of course the copyright holder himself is the person Ron Chapple and his business. If his business wanted to use an anonymous name on a stock site, they could and that's who the public 'copyright' would be attributed to.  Same with 'Yuri Arcurs' - a nom de plume. The real name associated with the file is a matter between the artist and the agency, and if the artist chooses to make that info public then they can do so. By opting-in to distribution channels, in this case, people have made the choice to have their photos represented in a collection context instead of a personal context - we had thought about 'Lynx Collection' as the name, maybe that would have avoided some confusion. That's all. :)         


« Reply #34 on: March 08, 2009, 14:08 »
0
I guess I have to see it this way too... But I'm not sure if I like it or not!

Anyway, thanks for the explanation, it makes little more sense to me now!

Claude

« Reply #35 on: March 10, 2009, 11:12 »
0
I just find that soooo odd that Panthermedia 'Lynx' can claim copyright on someone elses photo. I found this on their site under their licence agreement:

2.5 The author agrees that all licences for the contents he makes available may be granted without stating his name (i.e. anonymously). The author expressly waives his right to be named as author.


But it still doesn't say anywhere, that I can find, that people who upload to Panthermedia agree to allow Panthermedia to claim copyright to their photos.

« Reply #36 on: March 10, 2009, 11:29 »
0
But it still doesn't say anywhere, that I can find, that people who upload to Panthermedia agree to allow Panthermedia to claim copyright to their photos.

They don't. That's probably why their collection is called 'Lynx'.

« Reply #37 on: June 06, 2009, 10:38 »
0
Hello,

a user on zymmetrical has stolen two of my images, please check his profile if he stole some of your images too.
http://www.zymmetrical.com/artists/artist-profile/uid/53184/
 I am not sure but i think he downloaded them from flickr and upsized them. I dont think he bought them to upload them for himself, but who knows...

theese are the images:
http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-nature-animals/fileid/zyimgnaa25698/
http://www.zymmetrical.com/art/photos/photos-nature-animals/fileid/zyimgnaa17855/

I emailed zymmetrical about this.

What else can i do, can somebody help me, please?


Er, ahem, that top link leads to MY new Zymmetrical profile, which I just set up late last night. My images aren't even all up yet. Interestingly, when I go to your image links above and click on Lynx from there, I do get the Lynx page but it has the same URL as my new profile.

For the record, the thief IS NOT ME. Hey Zymmetrical, can I get a new link not associated with a thief pls??

zymmetricaldotcom

« Reply #38 on: June 06, 2009, 11:11 »
0
We are just rolling out the new public profile system - when you are logged in it shows your own info at the moment. Sorry for any confusion it will sorted out shortly.

RacePhoto

« Reply #39 on: June 17, 2009, 19:47 »
0
We are just rolling out the new public profile system - when you are logged in it shows your own info at the moment. Sorry for any confusion it will sorted out shortly.

Keep up the good work. It was entertaining poking fun at the minor database errors. Nothing serious.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1558 Views
Last post April 08, 2007, 02:06
by jeancliclac
17 Replies
5442 Views
Last post July 25, 2008, 14:28
by bendicks
48 Replies
12529 Views
Last post February 26, 2009, 12:24
by Microbius
38 Replies
10541 Views
Last post December 19, 2009, 23:06
by click_click
3 Replies
1875 Views
Last post April 02, 2016, 13:34
by noodle

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results