I figure this is as off topic as I can get. No model release, no property release, not newsworthy, closed event, trademarks and copyright. Other than that?  It's still fun to take them. Crop and levels, nothing else.

Nice shot. Cool if you had fun shooting it - on a site note: Others are making money selling stuff like this on Alamy. No releases required for non-news editorial.
Go get your stuff out there!

I've gone through this on a daily basis for the last 3 weeks with numerous web sites, hosts, registrars and companies selling products with my images on them.

Easiest way is to pay lots of $$$ for a lawyer. They will get the job done but will you be getting money back? That's a different story.

I found images of mine being sold as stickers at many places. First off, you need to figure out where the heck they got the image from. Most likely (my experience) the "infringer" will not tell you this sweet piece of information. You gotta get it yourself.

If you're exclusive good for you - if not, welcome to hell.

While Shutterstock and the like are very cooperative in such matters (time will pass though) you would have to contact all and I mean ALL the agencies you sell your images on...

As an example Crestock supposedly "does take this seriously" but I have never heard back from them after contacting the correct person at Crestock with the explicit request to inform me whether their investigation is going anywhere or not.

So, given the fact that you might not get 100% facts from your agents (I know it's sad) you will be left in a gray area where you technically and legally couldn't even act! There still remains the doubt that the "infringer" might have acquired a license from that one agency that never got back to you. So what do you do?

I don't have the $$$ for all the cases I have on my plate right now to hire a lawyer. Secondly the requirement when you want to hire a lawyer is having your copyright registered... Otherwise most lawyers will drop you like a hot potato because chances for a claim of damages will drop significantly and so will their commission if they decided to do a contingency.

This really pissed me off.

Now, being on my own (more or less - Shutterstock "investigating" - side note: Anthony does a fantastic job at this seriously) things still keep moving pretty slow. Too slow for me.

Every passing minute I see my image online for free download or on a product I get a rash between my toes.

So, I write a nice email to the webmaster/owner or whoever runs that thing asking for a license. Guess what happens?
You get an email back (if you're lucky...) with them saying (hold on tight):

"Oooooh I didn't know that this image was for sale, I downloaded it off the internet. If I would have known that it was for sale I would have paid for (I'm dying laughing...) or I bought a clipart CD and that image was on there". Needless to say that in most of such cases (of course my stuff is not on a Clipart CD for sale - der) the commercial reproduction is also not covered.

Most of the times they remove the image right there and then. Be sure to make screenshots and save the HTML code of the site before you do all this!!!!!

Now, if it comes down to that they don't present a valid license for the image in question.

1. They have to remove the image
2. You contact the web hosts for copyright infringement/copyright misrepresentation whatever . you like. You explain the web host who you are, link to the image in question at Shutterstock or wherever and make the claim. The web host will contact the owner of the site (usually) and shut them down (temporarily) until the owner either makes a counter-claim or removes the content. In my experience the site will go back online as soon as the content is removed.

Yep, the risk remains that it will happen again.

This thing is extremely frustrating, time consuming and/or expensive if you take a lawyer.

Besides, those "infringers" act like nothing happened after they took the image/s down.

Oftentimes I find a website with my image and also lots of images from other contributors. That's where it starts getting funny. I make the report to the web host. They take the site down. Owner removes image. Site goes back up. I contact another contributor whose copyright has been infringed and have him/her report the site to the web host again. So the process starts all over. Eventually the host will kick that "infringer" and they gotta setup their "shop" all over again. Gives me some satisfaction.

P.S. the term "infringer" could stand for a lot of words I'm not allowed to use here - use your imagination.

Enough is enough.

After spending weeks hunting down contributors, webmasters, web hosts and companies who distribute some of my images like free candy, I think it's time to unify the force of all people who are affected.

Everyday I sit down and research one of my images I find a MINIMUM of 5 web sites, individuals or companies who rip me off.

It's a lot (and I mean A LOT) of work to gather all necessary information before you can pursue image theft or copyright infringement and often times I come across sites that have lots of images from other fellow contributors. All I did was report them to Shutterstock because I really can't contact every single contributor - also given the fact that I have to look through their portfolios to make sure that I'm not writing to the wrong person.

I managed to temporarily shut down a few sites just because of my images but I know for sure once they remove my images and go back online that lots of your stuff will be out there - again!

I know I can't stop it from happening!

But if everyone of us invests 30 minutes a week doing some quick research we will make a huge impact. We won't get rid of it. But it will slow it down a lot!

Here are a few ideas for you to start researching your own images:

1. Use Tineye - I found aaaaaaaaaaa looooooooot of sites infringing copyright or offering my files for free download!!!! http://tineye.com/

2. Use Google or Yahoo image search. This is tedious as hell but I also found a lot of sites who ripped me off.

3. Google for rapidshare, megaupload, depositfiles, netload (AND MORE of such) portals. Use Meta-Search engines that crawl as many file sharing sites as possible. Search for simple terms "Shutterstock" or "Istock" - it will blow your mind.

4. Check out wallpaper sites or web sites with free images

If anyone has more ideas or tips and tricks please post so we can work as efficient as possible. It is affecting many of us - especially the ones who have been doing this for 3 to 5 years with big portfolios.

Wow, good detective work, cc.
Yes, it looks like one of them. they have different model. I suppose the better mirrors are more expensive so you get less aberrations in the reflected image.
yes,  although i think it was like 5 bucks brand new.

this one is also a bit boxy, there was one that is smaller and compact much like a microscope .

Yeah chromatic aberration - I can see that. Interesting stuff.

OK, I know in saying this I am ageing myself, but at least patballard is my peer. How many of you were shooting films during the Spiratone days? Well, I sold my whole studio equipment of all format when I quit in the late 90's to travel and teach. I used to have one of those as a photo correspondent.
You know what gadget I'm talking about. The quality suffers, but it's good enough for editorials. It's a little mirror that enables you to point in the direction 45 degree from your target, so they don't think you are shooting at them. It worked really well. The thing is to find if someone has renewed on this gadget and took over the patent.
Also, not sure if this will work over a digital lens.

Wow, interesting!

...These things fly over my house everyday while in training so I guess next time I'll just set the tripod up behind a tree and photograph them from my back yard!!

Of course the military makes use of the saying "it's for protection of national security" (since they are part of national security) quite often.

Instead of verifying who you are and what your motives are they mostly just send you away or tell you to stop (it's faster). Gotta respect that since you don't wanna mess with those guys.

For less militant areas I think that PDF is a bit helpful indeed. Especially the part about being held on location against your will...

...we shouldn't hijack this blog by click_click guessing the country i was talking about.

It's all good as long as people are having a good time 

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sitting here laughing my "you know what" off!!!

I had recently been shooting...lol...Apachie helicopters, which practice taking off and landing right next to the road. People are always out there right next to the site photographing. One day I set up the tri pod about 3/4 of a mile up the road on private property to photograph them. Well I guess the look out helicopter must have thought the tri pod was a machine gun or something because some one from the base came down and told me to quit photographing them and leave at once (again I was on private property!) or they were going to call the MP's which would call the state troopers and they would confiscate my card.....needless to say I put the camera up..but didn't leave.

It's sad that professional photographers are pushed away from opportunities like these where you can get real "close" without being a military photographer.

Just as a side note - I came across this PDF the other day (it's a bit old) but I think it gives some of you an idea how far to go when taking pics:

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

click_click, if you have denture, take off your dentures, and smile alot. no one likes to look at a toothless man especially when they smile at you ! except unless a toothless woman comes by, then you're in biggggg trouble. 

Sorry, don't have dentures yet - but it made me smile. Good laugh. 

Crestock has always downsized images, even when they started out. That's nothing new.

They recently reduced my 12 MP images down to small - I got them approved everywhere else - go figure. They even did that once with one of my 3D renders 

But if you look at it from this side: Wouldn't you rather have your file online in a small size than not at all...?

You can't argue that their subscription is lousy because all subscriptions are lousy - go to McDonalds with a sale from Shutterstock and a sale from Crestock - you won't be able to by anything with either commission. Of course the difference is the volume of sales.

Crestock always emphasized their high quality standards. While one can argue what kind of images did make it through their review queue it has to be mentioned that there is less crap on Crestock than at most other agencies (including the big ones).

That sets them apart from their competition. True though that not a lot of buyers care about that fact.

I got quite a few big credit sales lately with them so it's not all just bad. And in the end it's money too. These days you can't be picky whether you find 25 cents on the floor or if Crestock keeps earning you those amounts over months. Eventually you'll get a payout, and hey, it' gonna be 50 bucks - that'll buy you a small dinner or a night out at the movies.

Don't you love it when people see you in public with a tripod, shooting away and then they walk up to you (mostly walking through the shot  ) asking "Excuse me - what are you doing?"

In order to quickly get rid of those annoyances I simply answer "Ah, just taking pictures of this building/landscape" in order to sound as generic and boring as possible (this only works if you don't have a set with several lights and 3 PAs running around acting important...).

Does this happen to you as well?

I mean, why am I not randomly walking up to people asking them: "Excuse me - where are you going?" or "Excuse me - who are you talking to on your cell phone?" Why do people have to get into someone else's business?

 

I think you are pretty much talking about this: http://www.virtualbackgrounds.net/home.html

Has been done many years. Doesn't look real.

Some people like the post-cardy style...