Stolen Photo on Ebay
 

All

Just a quick heads up. One of my contacts emailed to let me know that someone was selling one of my Photos on birthday cards on Ebay. I have emailed the worm to remove it and pointed out that it is copywrited but it's really annoying to say the least.

He had downloaded it from Flickr (low res version), I am now thinking about adding watermarks to my pics but I do feel it spoils them for the genuine folk who like to browse.

Anyone had a similar experience?

Cheers

julio

What is the link to the photo?

i am sad to say that once you post a pic on the net it almost becomes public property, just right click and they have it . now that,s not a problem for me if they just want to look at it on their own computer , but taking it without asking permission , and using it to make money is plain stealing . as for watermarking ? if you put it in the centre of the pic , it ruin,s the picture .
but if you put it in the edges , it can just be cropped out altogether . sadly i do not see any way around it .

Add the watermark it looks like hell but what you going to do? I was a wedding photographer at one time and had more than one person make coppies of profs. Ever see a 8x10 coppie of a prof? :censored:

If you have the original photograph and the Exif Data, they will be something you can do about it?

Trophymick

I would water mark everything!!! I have had news papers print my photos and credited one of their staff. I have had a friend who had a someone submit his shot to a national prize (and won 5K). People are scum... so do what you have to to protect yourself. It is a shame for the people who just want to look, but you would not leave the keys in your bike right? cus most people jsut want to look there is always the 1 that will steal it!

if you need to know how to watermark in photoshop this is kinda an dummies guide

http://www.creativepro.com/img/story..._photoshop.pdf

As the original photographer you automatically have copyright. I'd report them for breach of copyright, you might not get any money back but it will be worth it to stop them doing this. It's almost certain they are doing this as a matter of course, ripping off lots of photographers in the process. As someone who used to do this for a living it really annoys me as I know how hard it is to make any money doing it.

Matt

Read The Fine Print...
 

Flickr's t&c's actually leave you quite unprotected. You have the option of posting unwatermarked (small) images - and only allow subscribers to have access to your big pics though.

A SMALL deterent - but nevertheless helps, is to just put a small strapline on your images... this discourages most people - and the actual act of REMOVING it... is more of a deliberate infringement, so people don't do it.

People "steal" our pics all the time, especially since we cover big artists and music events a lot of the time. No one has been as brazen as to sell the images on! (that we know of)

HOWEVER - if it makes you feel any better - people are usually pretty clueless about what they're doing wrong... seriously -- its not malice, its ignorance.

So - we send them a warning and a request to cease the usage - and they usually comply...


More galling, is the arrogance of big artists like Prodigy & Scissor Sisters, who will have kittens if someone uses their work without paying royalties -- yet, they expect to be able to use our images, without paying us!

A watermark wouldn't make that much difference if people really want the image and they can use something like Photoshop. Since you can zoom in to 1px it's pretty easy for anybody to remove it if they have the time or patience to do it.

An alternative would be to use a digital watermark which is a non-visible watermark that can only be read by a computer program. The copyright is embedded digitally within the image and would prove your ownership of it. However, at the end of the day proving ownership of the image and getting unauthorised use curtailed or royalties for the use of, are two different things.

Unfortunately if you put good/interesting images on the internet, you have to expect (if not accept) that people 'borrow' them. Which under normal circumstances is flattering, but if they are trying to make money then that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Ebay will help you get the guy to not use your photo and can ban him, but you will not see and £ from this

No it wont.. but it slows em down and they are more likely to just steal the next guys photo then yours..

The problem with digital copywrite is that you have to pay the holding company so you lose money there and the cost of retrieving the moneys from the infringing party is also extremely expensive, you will lose money even in the 5k case. like locks on windows it is a deterrent and nothing will stop a determined thief.

All other methods (puzzle cuts, table masks(clear gif), digital signatures) take a lot more time, (water marks can be batch automated) and are really no safer. The only way to completely stop theft is not to post, but then we can t show our work.

All in all we have the short end of the stick.

Happened to me a couple of times - but then I'm not a pro and don't make any money from my photos so it doesn't really bother me.

Having said that a few months ago there was a large fire in Hatfield and I happened to be on scene with my decent camera and took quite a few decent shots - shots I later discovered in building magazines!

I release all my photos under a creative commons licence on flickr - so people are free to take my photos and use them for personal use - their websites and such - but if they use them publicly they must credit me and the can not make any money from them.

When I contacted the publishing companies involved I pointed out that my photos had been taken from flickr, that the licence requirements were clearly attached to my photos (see - hatfield fire 004 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!) and that I was sending them an invoice at the current NUJ rate for use of the images. They paid up within the week.

I really wouldn't recommend putting up any shots that you don't want people to use online without protection - from my point of view I don't see the point in holding onto the rights unless you actually make your living from them - and I'd rather use a licence which tells people what they can do with my photos rather than what they can't.

This is a good attitude. Any pix I take these days and hope to make a few bob out of, don't go on Flickr. The pix that do I'm happy for people to use as long as they don't try to make money.

Matt

I don't put any tags on mine or name them with content specific names. Surely this would slow someone down when searching for an image. They'd see a lot before they got to mine. If I post them on a forum then I expect people can use them if they wish. I'd be a bit annoyed if a big company was using any of my images for gain though. I post images on my blogs too. Some of the providers of these free sites want you to give them intellectual rights to all of your content! That doesn't seem right. I ended up using Wordpress as their policy seemed a bit better from that point.

If you don't want this to happen then don't post your stuff online it's that simple. Have a look at my website - it contains 6GB of photos and none are obscured by stupid watermarks. If anyone wants to use the data then go ahead. All I ask is that the website is mentioned as the source. So there, if this kind of thing upsets you, DONT POST IT!

If you are putting the pics up on your own site or a blog it's easy to foil all but the most determined by just dropping a quick 'no right click' tag in for each individual pic or complete page - lots of different ways to do it here: no right click, disable copy and paste, secure web site
This will also work on a lot of blog sites and some photo galleries too.
Richard