There's a guy called KhoirCreative. He took one of my images, filtered it in PS or elsewhere, posted to SS and gained revenue for almost a year till i accidentally stumbled upon his portfolio. I have also recognized two images of another author and notified him immediately.
I have also written a message to SS support, but received only a generic reply. After contacting SS FB page, I was instructed to send DMCA notice, which I did - and it is a time unnecessary consuming process to complete - but no reply was given in a week. So I filed another report, and a week later stolen image was removed from thief's portfolio. Also, two images of a contributor I have contacted earlier were removed.
Final result - more than two weeks of writing e-mail and complaining, only to protect what's mine, and the thief is still there. His portfolio is not removed, they took down only reported images.
Check him out, maybe you are also bringing bread to someone else's table - https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Khoirillistration

Shouldn't be a standard practice for SS to ban thieves altogether?
If 3 images are reported as stolen, there is a good chance, he has stolen other images.

Quote from: Les on August 23, 2020, 00:16
Shouldn't be a standard practice for SS to ban thieves altogether?
If 3 images are reported as stolen, there is a good chance, he has stolen other images.

Certainly should be standard practice, but they don't care where they make their money from. Having an image being sold by the original artist and one or multiple thieves just increases their chance for a sale. How do you think the top brass got to be a zillionaire?

Crooked money is worth the same as honest money

Quote from: igor on August 22, 2020, 12:31
...
Check him out, maybe you are also bringing bread to someone else's table - https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Khoirillistration

This illustration
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/lion-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585086241
is a filtered version of this photo:
https://news.sky.com/story/lioness-kills-father-of-her-three-cubs-at-indianapolis-zoo-11532092

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589482882
is a filtered version of this still from a movie:
https://growthcommissionblog.org/film/405034/jilbab-traveler-love-sparks-in-korea

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/tiger-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585075810
is a filtered version of
https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianscott/150007690/in/photolist-eV6aj-eibKr-eod53-efQ4u-ei9fg-2MN5YD-4BzHB1-7fQMry-5v3cLg-5v7Ekj-7fQNwA-7fQN93-7fLSbB-5v3m9n-7fLWgn-7fQSvh-7fLWJv-7fLRyD-7fLVWg-7fQNQ5-7fLWY6-7fQMVb-4Bvr6c-7fQJoE-7fLLkn-sEEGa-7fLSRn-7fLNNz-7fQL6u-7fQJBu-2giNQz

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589481829
is a filtered version of this one:
https://www.liputan6.com/global/read/3083716/australia-bersiap-hadapi-musim-dingin-terganas

Every other file I clicked on is available on the internet, though it would take more time to identify the original author.
SS didn't even try Google Reverse Image Search. They really don't care.

Quote from: ShadySue on August 23, 2020, 01:41

Quote from: igor on August 22, 2020, 12:31
...
Check him out, maybe you are also bringing bread to someone else's table - https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Khoirillistration

This illustration
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/lion-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585086241
is a filtered version of this photo:
https://news.sky.com/story/lioness-kills-father-of-her-three-cubs-at-indianapolis-zoo-11532092

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589482882
is a filtered version of this still from a movie:
https://growthcommissionblog.org/film/405034/jilbab-traveler-love-sparks-in-korea

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/tiger-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585075810
is a filtered version of
https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianscott/150007690/in/photolist-eV6aj-eibKr-eod53-efQ4u-ei9fg-2MN5YD-4BzHB1-7fQMry-5v3cLg-5v7Ekj-7fQNwA-7fQN93-7fLSbB-5v3m9n-7fLWgn-7fQSvh-7fLWJv-7fLRyD-7fLVWg-7fQNQ5-7fLWY6-7fQMVb-4Bvr6c-7fQJoE-7fLLkn-sEEGa-7fLSRn-7fLNNz-7fQL6u-7fQJBu-2giNQz

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589481829
is a filtered version of this one:
https://www.liputan6.com/global/read/3083716/australia-bersiap-hadapi-musim-dingin-terganas

Every other file I clicked on is available on the internet, though it would take more time to identify the original author.
SS didn't even try Google Reverse Image Search. They really don't care.

This post should be sent to the SS shareholders before their next conference.

BTW, since you already did all this work identifying the stolen images, you might send this also to SS Support.

I think they just don't care. It is more than obvious that everything in this port is a thievery. This guy is obviously there for easy money, but someone is getting rich even more and even easier.
ShadySue, thanks for providing those examples. I was to angry to investigate deeper into this portfolio.

Quote from: Les on August 23, 2020, 04:47

Quote from: ShadySue on August 23, 2020, 01:41

Quote from: igor on August 22, 2020, 12:31
...
Check him out, maybe you are also bringing bread to someone else's table - https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Khoirillistration

This illustration
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/lion-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585086241
is a filtered version of this photo:
https://news.sky.com/story/lioness-kills-father-of-her-three-cubs-at-indianapolis-zoo-11532092

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589482882
is a filtered version of this still from a movie:
https://growthcommissionblog.org/film/405034/jilbab-traveler-love-sparks-in-korea

This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/tiger-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585075810
is a filtered version of
https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianscott/150007690/in/photolist-eV6aj-eibKr-eod53-efQ4u-ei9fg-2MN5YD-4BzHB1-7fQMry-5v3cLg-5v7Ekj-7fQNwA-7fQN93-7fLSbB-5v3m9n-7fLWgn-7fQSvh-7fLWJv-7fLRyD-7fLVWg-7fQNQ5-7fLWY6-7fQMVb-4Bvr6c-7fQJoE-7fLLkn-sEEGa-7fLSRn-7fLNNz-7fQL6u-7fQJBu-2giNQz

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589481829
is a filtered version of this one:
https://www.liputan6.com/global/read/3083716/australia-bersiap-hadapi-musim-dingin-terganas

Every other file I clicked on is available on the internet, though it would take more time to identify the original author.
SS didn't even try Google Reverse Image Search. They really don't care.

This post should be sent to the SS shareholders before their next conference.

BTW, since you already did all this work identifying the stolen images, you might send this also to SS Support.

As I don't have an account there, I sent a guest post, but I only had 400 characters, so just the top link then a note to say all others are findable online. Maybe others could send them more? I'm blocked from Oringer's Twitter, but maybe I can blast some quickly to SS's Twitter before being banned, and presumably also Fb. If anyone else would like to join in, feel free!

OK, four tweets sent after the note to support, one for each of the ones I found. Also all messaged to their Facebook account.

Added: I tried to post to TrustPilot, but they don't allow links in reviews, and I thought 'this site sells stolen images' without the evidence just looked like a jilted ex, so I didn't post.

Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?

Quote from: Digital on August 24, 2020, 17:00
Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?

Historically, iS used to ban people for posting files for which they didn't have copyright. They actually blocked ports pending enquiry following a complaint, which was a bit unfair if someone was innocent (in the days when a few days 'down' could mean a serious money loss).
However, there was definitely a time when they wouldn't investigate unless it was the actual copyright owner who contacted them.

I don't know what happens there now, haven't seen a thread here for a while.
Previous threads here have shown that SS can take weeks to take down an abuser.

Meanwhile, I got a reply from their twitter presence:
Thank you for letting us know. We've submitted this for review with our compliance team.  That was an hour ago, so you can keep checking to see how long it takes. Quite possibly/probably all of that port isn't their copyright.

Quote from: Digital on August 24, 2020, 17:00
Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?

Yes, I do.  I have occasionally found stolen images on other stock sites, but never whole portfolios like this.  You would think the heavy use of filters would be a clue to the reviewers. 

Shutterstock used to reject images that relied on simple filter effects, since anyone can do them.

I just found this portfolio: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/lazaralinsilviu
It looked suspicious so I checked random 5 images, they were all on pixabay (under different authors). I wonder were he gets the videos from..
I think SS does not care at all, there are I think hundreds of "contributors" like this.

I've just noticed, which I didn't before, that the pics I linked to above have 'signed property release on file with Shutterstock' on them.
Could it be that the author has got permission from the original photographers to use their files?
(OTOH, s/he used the OP's files without permission and I don't know if the PR note was on their file pages).

Quote from: zsooofija on August 27, 2020, 01:56
I just found this portfolio: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/lazaralinsilviu
It looked suspicious so I checked random 5 images, they were all on pixabay (under different authors). I wonder were he gets the videos from..
I think SS does not care at all, there are I think hundreds of "contributors" like this.

I tweeted about this earlier today after seeing your post in the Coalition group. It's outrageous on so many levels. Usually I email Shutterstock about things like this, but at this point I decided public shaming was appropriate

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1300503016198385664

They can't take my account away twice

I have messaged the three artists via Pixabay. I also contacted Pixabay support to suggest they contact Sutterstock to get this portfolio taken down. Uploading to Shutterstock is a violation of the Pixabay license

https://pixabay.com/service/license/

Quote from: Digital on August 24, 2020, 17:00
Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?

Yes I do but sometimes getting the account shut down is still difficult

Quote from: Les on August 23, 2020, 00:16
Shouldn't be a standard practice for SS to ban thieves altogether?
If 3 images are reported as stolen, there is a good chance, he has stolen other images.

Yes they should and 3 is proof that somebody didn't make a mistake.

Quote from: ShadySue on August 24, 2020, 23:43

Quote from: Digital on August 24, 2020, 17:00
Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?

Historically, iS used to ban people for posting files for which they didn't have copyright. They actually blocked ports pending enquiry following a complaint, which was a bit unfair if someone was innocent (in the days when a few days 'down' could mean a serious money loss).
However, there was definitely a time when they wouldn't investigate unless it was the actual copyright owner who contacted them.

I don't know what happens there now, haven't seen a thread here for a while.
Previous threads here have shown that SS can take weeks to take down an abuser.

Meanwhile, I got a reply from their twitter presence:
Thank you for letting us know. We've submitted this for review with our compliance team.  That was an hour ago, so you can keep checking to see how long it takes. Quite possibly/probably all of that port isn't their copyright.

SS hides behind DMCA, they are incompetent and ignorant.

oooo...lazaralinsilviu has some images with Kermit the Frog in them.

I've reported this to Disney.  BOOM!

Portfolio is all still there - Kermits & all - so I broke down and wrote to Compliance at Shutterstock. They're being idiotic and while I don't care if they scare buyers away from Shutterstock, an environment where buyers are leery of the legality of agency images isn't good for any of the agencies, so I think that portfolio really needs to come down.

I also think this gives an F grade to their AI review-bots, dropping a 7 of 10 new contributor requirement and absence of any program to check on the first hundred or so new uploads from a new contributor (where most of these types of scams would be caught).

All SS cares about is that the thread exposing thieves is taken down whilst the thieves remain. As usual the thief comes to the forum asking people to show their most popular and when one of the forum regulars posts 5 photo's of the thief's next to 5 originals of theirs others chip in to show that the name and photo of the contributor are fake as is the country of residence given (USA but likely India).

Thief's port: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/design_space

Port is still up but the forum thread has been disappeared. 'Course that's the easiest thing to do...no thread, no discovery, no problem with thievery.

Profile photo fake too: https://twitter.com/amina_saidy

There's another brazen thief posting over on the Contributor Experience forum over on SS. He/she/ it is asking what kinds of subjects sell. Probably looking for more photos to steal (based on recommendations of subject matter.)

Edit: woops I didn't realise that this same thread was already being discussed.

By the way, it may have been Design Space who deleted that thread. There was another thief who posted on the forum some time back and it was believed that that one was deleted by the thief himself when he was exposed by other contributors.

Quote from: dragonblade on September 02, 2020, 18:52
There's another brazen thief posting over on the Contributor Experience forum over on SS. He/she/ it is asking what kinds of subjects sell. Probably looking for more photos to steal (based on recommendations of subject matter.)

Edit: woops I didn't realise that this same thread was already being discussed.

By the way, it may have been Design Space who deleted that thread. There was another thief who posted on the forum some time back and it was believed that that one was deleted by the thief himself when he was exposed by other contributors.

Ah! Didn't realise that that was possible. He/she was the OP but I'm surprised that it's possible to delete everything once the thread has developed. Must admit it did seem rather fast work for SS!!

I have done what I can about Design Space. I've written to Kirsty Pargeter, one of the contributors whose work was stolen, and Shutterstock compliance with this list of infringing images & their originals

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/design_space



https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/3d-rendering-geometric-fountain-shapes-confetti-1707075184
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/3d-render-geometric-fountain-shape-background-1444945241

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/landscape-scenario-pond-fresh-water-reflecting-1631263534
https://www.eyeem.com/p/160296239

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/high-mountain-scent-tall-trees-during-1631263558
https://unsplash.com/photos/ndN00KmbJ1c

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/landscape-architectural-bridge-light-renderings-1575392185
https://stock.adobe.com/images/golden-gate-bridge-in-san-francisco/306575074

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/half-sliced-reddish-cabbage-leaves-1691385208
https://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/34631589.html

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/five-baked-muffin-cakes-basket-1686503539
https://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/34631629.html

I also tweeted about it

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1301295094738219010

If you look at the edits, they are truly dreadful. The Yosemite image has severe banding visible even in the preview - these should have been rejected for quality (given the terrible edits; there was nothing wrong with the originals).

Given at least one of the ones I found is also on Shutterstock, and that they can identify duplicates on upload in your own portfolio, it beggars belief that they don't even check against their own collection when approving images.

Another F for the Ai review-bots.

Thanks Jo Ann. Let's see how long it takes to remove the whole port. Knowing SS, if Kirsty Pargeter complains, they'll remove her image and leave the rest intact. They really don't give a s**t.

What always amazes me is that I've never seen a thief that isn't a serial offender yet SS will only remove the first couple of images that the real authors complain about. Only after 3+ complaints will they shut down the port. IMO if a 'subscriber' has one stolen image then the rest of their port is most likely also stolen.

The trouble is that policing image theft is not part of the profitable operation. Not preventing it is/can be profitable for SS. After all, thieves only steal good sellers and if SS can sell the same popular image twice and then withhold payment to the fraudulent contributor and not have to compensate the original author, then that's a real win-win situation for SS.

Most of these accounts with stolen work are probably operated by SS staff themselves, that's why they don't act on it. SS creates fake contributor accounts with different names and fills them up with stolen material and reaps huge profit from it. Even if 1 account is closed after repeated complaining, 10 more show up in its place,it is a big game.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on September 02, 2020, 18:04
Portfolio is all still there - Kermits & all -

It usually takes a few days for the report to get through the queue of other reports, but once it does, Disney is even more rigorous than Mattel.