Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-14-2016, 08:01 AM - 2 Likes   #16
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,979
QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
Hope you recovered!
Thanks... I mean "plaque"... arh... English spelling...

09-14-2016, 08:06 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
I'm guessing that Facebook has a picture matching algorithm, and did me a favour by putting it in my feed ! Too big a coincidence to be anything else I think.
I'd guess it's more likely a semi-coincidence? If FB has a reason to think you're interested in insects (like the fact that you posted one and possibly text to indicate that's what it was), it will then try to spam you with insect related things, and the poke is pretty popular.

I ran google searches on the images in that article, and couldn't see an obvious common denominator (I was wondering if they all came from flickr). Some were from stock sites (though may have been lifted from other sources by the poke).

Good Luck!
09-14-2016, 08:10 AM   #18
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,108
The Poke seems to have pulled it.

FWIW...I have found mine out in the wild before and have had good luck with take-down. The only time that was hard was Tumblr where the image had been reshared hundreds of times.


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 09-14-2016 at 08:16 AM.
09-14-2016, 08:54 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
You should send them an invoice. They will most likely take it down.

In the future, you could use image google search > by picture to look for places where your photographs appear.
I found a few websites using my photos this way, but in every single case a single email was sufficient to have them take it down.

09-14-2016, 02:12 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 137
Original Poster
Finding your image on a commercial website ..

QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
While I sympathise with the OP on the dilemma, I fail to see the correlation between the photo posted and
Of course, you may have been looking after they ripped off someone else's image, and replaced mine

---------- Post added 09-14-16 at 03:10 PM ----------



Original image before it was replaced....

Last edited by Ian.morgan; 09-14-2016 at 02:22 PM.
09-14-2016, 04:57 PM   #21
Dark Underlord
Loyal Site Supporter
AquaDome's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New Carlisle, IN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,475
It is important to make contact every time you find your unlicensed images "in the wild". Failing to protect your images sets a legal precedent. If you fail to respond to license violations, it could be claimed that your "defacto" position is to allow your images to be used. This is why big companies always send nasty letters to anyone who even comes close to their trademarks or licensed intellectual property. If they don't act, they weaken their position to act when it is truly necessary.
09-14-2016, 05:22 PM   #22
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,979
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
Of course, you may have been looking after they ripped off someone else's image, and replaced mine

---------- Post added 09-14-16 at 03:10 PM ----------



Original image before it was replaced....
Ah ha... thanks, I thought there is something wrong with my eyes (sign of getting old, sigh..).
09-14-2016, 06:30 PM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,482
QuoteOriginally posted by rrstuff Quote
You should send them an invoice.

I reckon you should do this too, in future. Make up a number equal to buying a stock picture, $400 or whatever.


I was at a workshop run by the excellent sports and advertising photographer Lucas Wroe, who said IIRC he pays two different agencies for their algorithms to constantly monitor the web and publications for misuse of his images.


He said a lot of the time the offences are done by time-pressured, quite junior employees even inside very big and rich companies. It's easy to copy and paste instead of bothering to chase down the actual rights holder.


So the invoice need not be abusive, just very commercial, very matter-of-fact.


They may simply remove the material rather than pay ... that's to be expected, and you'd have to begin legal proceedings to do anything else about it, which in most cases will be impractical.

09-15-2016, 01:16 PM   #24
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 137
Original Poster
Yeah , they had already removed it within 2 hours of me mailing them, and replaced with a shutterstock image by the end of the day (Hopefully paid for!). The original does still appear in Facebook though, where it must be cached somehow.

They made me an offer for my inconvenience, but I'm tempted to reject it since they so clearly made no effort to seek my permission and it wouldn't have been hard at all , and they should really learn that lazy journalism is not on.

They got the image from a Google search which came up with the image on here, along with a clear footnote 'this image may be subject to copyright'.


09-15-2016, 02:46 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
Yeah , they had already removed it within 2 hours of me mailing them, and replaced with a shutterstock image by the end of the day (Hopefully paid for!). The original does still appear in Facebook though, where it must be cached somehow.

They made me an offer for my inconvenience, but I'm tempted to reject it since they so clearly made no effort to seek my permission and it wouldn't have been hard at all , and they should really learn that lazy journalism is not on.

They got the image from a Google search which came up with the image on here, along with a clear footnote 'this image may be subject to copyright'.

I think you should accept the offer, unless it's laughable, or for some reason the publication of your photos on their website affects your brand negatively. It seems like they actually did ok. I don't think I have ever seen someone react within 2 hrs.
09-15-2016, 06:19 PM   #26
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,482
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
.

They made me an offer for my inconvenience, but I'm tempted to reject it since they so clearly made no effort to seek my permission and it wouldn't have been hard at all , and they should really learn that lazy journalism is not on.
Just take it, Ian! 😀

A truckload of champagne for you, or just a thimble?



09-15-2016, 08:18 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,395
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
They made me an offer for my inconvenience, but I'm tempted to reject it since they so clearly made no effort to seek my permission and it wouldn't have been hard at all , and they should really learn that lazy journalism is not on.
The problem is, it was your image that they essentially stole. It is your rules, not theirs. Determine what the image is worth, triple it for their inappropriate actions, and tell them to pay or let the Judge decide. Keep a running diary if you do go to court, as I would think that a number of sites would like to run with your story. Ah and the negative publicity that they would receive....

09-16-2016, 05:30 AM   #28
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,292
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian.morgan Quote
I would be interested to know where they got it though.
If it's Facebook, then that implies they could have used pictures of my family. If it was from here, then it implies the licensing settings on here aren't clear enough.
I think your case is an example of why it's a good idea for us to toss our best images into Google Image Search every so often and see what pops up. I've found several of my images on Pinterest pages and all of them were taken from here. In my case, nobody was making any money off my work. They were simply using my pics to illustrate a part of our state that they love, so..."no harm, no foul".
09-19-2016, 05:26 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,209
QuoteOriginally posted by interested_observer Quote
Keep a running diary if you do go to court, as I would think that a number of sites would like to run with your story. Ah and the negative publicity that they would receive....
This seems likely to backfire and just end up giving publicity to the poke (the may not care if it's good or bad) and rouse legions of poke fans declaring he should be happy for the free publicity his image received (not my view, just my crystal balls).

This won't be the first image they've lifted from the web. Someone with time on their hands and a beef with the poke could probably have a fun weekend finding other cases on their website and piling up some documentation to send out to the big photo news websites or organize a mass of dmca take down notices aimed at the poke.

On a related note, I wonder if there have been any academic studies on % of images used without permission on websites like this? Or smaller ones.
09-19-2016, 09:44 AM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,395
QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
This seems likely to backfire and just end up giving publicity to the poke (the may not care if it's good or bad) and rouse legions of poke fans declaring he should be happy for the free publicity his image received (not my view, just my crystal balls).
As P.T. Barnum use to say “I don't care what you say about me, just spell my name right”. There is always that danger. Also, the public generally cares little about copyrights in general - especially when ever Disney's copyrights (Micky Mouse) are about expire they ram another extension through congress.

QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
This won't be the first image they've lifted from the web. Someone with time on their hands and a beef with the poke could probably have a fun weekend finding other cases on their website and piling up some documentation to send out to the big photo news websites or organize a mass of dmca take down notices aimed at the poke.
In my opinion, the US arrangement on Copyrights - especially concerning photos, is that the requirement to register in order to recover statutory damages and especially legal fees - along with the high cost of going to Federal Court (I have seen estimates that start at $30,000 in legal fees), essentially protects the infringer more than the copyright holder. If you fail to register, it is economically impossible for you to sue - and the infringer is off scott free.

Also, if you read the recent law changes - to be perfectly legal, in order to use the DMCA the image needs to be registered. Otherwise the infringer can just ignore the take down notice. Now that is usually not what happens - but I am just waiting for some infringer to push back hard on that - and make good use of some image not being registered.

What is nice about the OP being in the UK is their Copyright Small Claims Court where with a minimum of expense, some basic documentation and no lawyers (nor their added expense) you can recover a reasonable sum - 10,000 pounds.

QuoteOriginally posted by BrianR Quote
On a related note, I wonder if there have been any academic studies on % of images used without permission on websites like this? Or smaller ones.
I would think that it would be somewhat of a guess at best. You really would not know for certain if the image had been licensed or permission granted - Creative Commons, etc.

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
agency, bill, click, contact, copyright, details, disregard, facebook, flickr, friends, google, image, photo industry, photography, pm, post, professionals, search, site
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
a brief test of a different image hosting website to see if and how it works goatsNdonkey General Photography 19 07-13-2016 01:46 PM
KS2 - iPhone 5 - Image Sync not finding camera Pumenlichen Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 6 04-26-2016 03:19 AM
PayPal denies teenager reward for finding website bug. interested_observer General Talk 10 06-11-2013 06:15 PM
Could I Please have your humble opinions on my Website Softsoap Photographic Technique 25 06-06-2011 06:45 PM
a nice surprise - another image selected to be used on NANPA's website Marc Langille Post Your Photos! 13 10-29-2008 04:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:42 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top