Photo thief

One member of this forum:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kicos-Reptiles-House/469597109728695

steals my photos from here and posts it without asking, without permission, without credit and without linking back on facebook. I commented on it that he must remove it. His reaction was to block me from further comments and argumented that I did not point out my copyright here. Of course I informed facebook.

OK man, to get it clear:
THERE IS NO NEED TO POINT OUT THE COPYRIGHT ANYWHERE. COPYRIGHT IS AN INTRINSIC RIGHT FOR THE PERSON WHO MADE THE PICTURE. AND STEALING AND USING A PICTURE IS THEFT AS STEALING A CAR OR A SNAKE.

Anybody who knows me knows that I always give the permission to use my photos as long as I am linked back and it is not a commercial use. But I really get sick from these stupid idiots now.

I have had the same problem with some of mine being used on a couple of peoples sites and even making out they were the photographer! Idiots!

Right sayed!

What a poor boy, that need to use the pictures from others without permission, to make hiself better than he is.

I know a similar case in the US: A friend of mine give pictures for an article, it was a print in a reptile magazine. By surfing the web, I found his pictures on a site of an ,,famous´´ snake dealer, he has scanned the magazine pictures and use them to offer snakes, he has never had, specialy- Pitvipers from India. I informed my friend, he informed a very good friend in the US and than - very fast the pictures was removed and my friend got a lot of mails and apology´s and the please to do no proceedings against him. The fear about the justice in the US was what this man bring to the right side. Because, it was not for a private using, it was the side from his company! I can imagine that it can be very expencive to break the copyright rules! Also in europe!

The same happened to me several times.

I agree with both of you, only the term "Idiots"is too weak, especially if these people claim they were the photographer.
A cold comfort may be that the photos are regarded as being so good that they are worth using them that way. But still this doesn´t make theft less immoral.

Nevertheless I wish you a good year 2013 without this or any other sort of trouble.

Rainer

Thanks!
Have a nice 2013 everybody!

Btw: I always feel honoured if I am credited or linked back (and it is non commercial), so why don't the simply ask to use it?

Is this news ?

I guess it is news to those who did not yet know, what copyright means.
If it was not new to You, I congratulate You. You are gracefully dismissed from this thread then Very Happy

Whatever..

Well, actually you cannot compare car wheels with photos. We do not deal with car wheels here, but with photos.
Having this problem with stolen pictures here too now and then is reason enough to talk about it in my opinion.
If you don't like the thread please overlook it - it only needs one click.....
Having moved the thread from "News" to the Photo-forum will hopefully bring peace and satisfaction to you.
With my best wishes for the New Year
Peter (who's not amused that New Year starts with senseless personal disputes here)

Further personal offtopics will be removed!

Mr. Leitenbauer -

I hope you get him to take them down and to acknowledge you as the rightful owner and photographer of the picture. Your photography is excellent. Very much enjoy your series on, um, women and serpents, but all shots are very well-done.

A thought occurs - would a highly-visible watermark detract too much from your excellent work? It might deter at least the lazier thieves...

A happy new year to you and to all herps. It is, after all, year of the snake.

Thank You Mr Meador,

Of course I thought about watermarks. But IMHO it distracts way too much, so I stopped using watermarks years ago. I simply belief in the intelligence and political correctness of people, as I was always rather an optimist than a pessimist.

Sometimes reality overrules that Wink

Yes, he already removed the pictures. I guess he learned his lesson, and that seems to be an acceptable result for me.

Happy New Year to You too!

and it goes on...
a Facebook member has stolen my picture of scaleless Bitis arietans and posted it on Facebook - i haven't been asked for a permission, and no credit to the author has been given.
Additionally, new VenomLand member Greg Grindstaff shared that picture.
It's illegal to even share a stolen picture.
It's just a shame - and it could be that easy, guys: Just send a PM and ask for permission - most authors will say yes, if credit is given and the picture is not used commercially.

Some day, i will be tired enough of that bu....it and i will order my lawyer to get some extra money for me (and for him).....

The picture has been deleted meanwhile, but the thief still claims that it's been his right to use it......and let his visitors believe it's his property.

Sorry folks, but I'd recommend a more relaxed and practical view on this issue. Copyright is important for sure, otherwise nobody would invent anything anymore. However, as we all know, the net is almost its own universe, and it is next to impossible to control its contents. So my advice would be: if you are concerned about copyright, publish your stuff in print, not in the net. No car developmental engineer would put the blueprints of his newly developed car on the net (not even with copyright marks) and then wonder when the car is offered next year somewhere in Asia. Get realistic!

The pics that I post on this forum are usually without copyright marks, and everybody is welcome to use them for personal purposes.

Klaus that was maybe the most thoughtless statement I read here on Venomland for a long time.

If a thief steals Your car and tells You "Well, it was not visible to me that this is Your car" - what would be Your reaction? Or if someone comes into a supermarket and starts eating food without paying for it: "Well, I did not know that this was not free!"

"a more relaxed and practical view" - stupid argument!

Some people make cars, some food - and others photographs! Just because it can be published "without effort or cost" does not mean, that it is freely available for everybody who just needs one! Even photographers have a right that their rights are protected, and I tell You: I will sue every F****** bastard from now on who publishes my pictures without at least a link back.

I btw never ever rejected a question for using my photographs (except for commercially usage). But a short PM or email or at least a link back is just and reasonable. If someone can use a computer to publish a picture one may think that he is able to send a PM or Email too.

Blue prints of new cars...ahem...in our language, Klaus: Nicht alles was hinkt, ist ein Vergleich. And i'm not going to talk about the question if your example is realistic or not....LOL

It's everbody's free choice to let other people use his/her pictures completely uncontrolled.

I do not allow to use my pictures, and that's my free choice too, without
a) beeing asked, and
b) giving credit to the author by the user, and (even more important) the place where they have been taken!

For a private person (who's not making her living out of his reptile collection - and pictures as a part resp. product of it) it's easy to allow free, uncontrolled use.

But i DO make my living out of this stuff, this includes giving pictures to third parties for commercial purposes - additionally i will have some public relation for my zoo when pictures are labelled properly with the author's name and place of taking.

Get realistic? ...hmm...maybe you should?

As Günter already posted, property is property - and theft ist theft.

Additionally, as an admin here, i won't allow our members to post other pictures than their own or such pictures where they have asked for permission to use it/post it here.

It's not that easy.....and i know from at least 2 forums seeing themselves in big troubles recently.

Guenther and Peter, you're deliberately misunderstanding me. It is obvious that stealing a car is theft - but parking a car where you know the chance for it being stolen is 90 %, is .... well... you decide what it is. To make myself more clear: copyright is a high good, and copyright violation is a crime. But the net is a place in the grey zone with respect to copyright (even law professionals don't deny that), and we all know that. So putting your stuff there is like asking for it...

No, it is definitely no grey zone.
The law is clear.
I don't know which "law professionals" You mean, but it is simply wrong.

I just googled that - for Germany and Austria:

http://www.internetrecht-rostock.de/abmahnung-bilder-fotos.htm

https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/172/Seite.1720430.html

Klaus, I must say that saying 'So putting your stuff there is like asking for it...' is like saying she was wearing a short skirt so she was asking to be raped. It doesn't matter if you park your car in the worst neighborhood with the keys in it, it does not make the crime any less of a crime, if that makes sense.

Absolutely right, that's just turning the victims into offenders and is in no way constructive when it comes to curtail these violations.

Point well taken, Andrew, but would you as a lady go to a place where a rapist is supposed to be active and wear a short shirt?? Probably not. So wait until the law inforcement fraction has done its job. Its the same with the net. Currently professionals are trying hard to get the copyright issue for the net sorted out. Its not as trivial as some seem to believe. Technically, every half sentence in some thread is the result of some sort of creative process. So what precisely do you want to be covered by copyright? Everything? That would be highly impractical and uncontrolable. Photographies? And should there be a difference between a 5 seconds shot with a handycam and a shot during a two hour photo session? My personal view is (and I would like to stress here: personal!): People should come to an agreement that most stuff in the net is shareware. This should then be made public, and contributors then know that if they like their stuff to be copyright protected, they have to go elsewhere (perhaps some specially protected sub-net). Would this make the net altogether a worse place, with lower-quality contributions, in the long run? Hardly.

I leave this now, I don't want to get personal, but I would, if reading on such nonsense...

Klaus Roemer wrote:: Point well taken, Andrew, but would you as a lady go to a place where a rapist is supposed to be active and wear a short shirt?? Probably not. So wait until the law inforcement fraction has done its job. Its the same with the net. Currently professionals are trying hard to get the copyright issue for the net sorted out. Its not as trivial as some seem to believe. Technically, every half sentence in some thread is the result of some sort of creative process. So what precisely do you want to be covered by copyright? Everything? That would be highly impractical and uncontrolable. Photographies? And should there be a difference between a 5 seconds shot with a handycam and a shot during a two hour photo session? My personal view is (and I would like to stress here: personal!): People should come to an agreement that most stuff in the net is shareware. This should then be made public, and contributors then know that if they like their stuff to be copyright protected, they have to go elsewhere (perhaps some specially protected sub-net). Would this make the net altogether a worse place, with lower-quality contributions, in the long run? Hardly.

Klause, I do understand what you are getting at. I do not think that it matters if you took a photo with your phone and took 2 seconds or are a professional photographer and and was a 2 hour photo shoot, that is still your photo, your property. Just because YOU share it online does not give someone else the right to take it and share it further without permission and at minimum credit to the photographer. You say that it should all be shareware, your opinion yes, but what happens when someone prints it in a book or other media (to avoid this shareware mentality) and the book gets copied online and shared, is that not a copy right violation? But once its there its automatically 'shareware' as you say, and then the creator has lost all rights to their own property. It is no different than the film and music industry, their media gets illegally reproduced and shared and downloaded all the time, and even if the artist NEVER shares it online it inevitably will endup there. I think people need to learn to respect other peoples property. LIke has been said a few times in this thread, how hard is it to ask the owner of the property if it is ok to share it? The problem is most of these people are trying to make up for something and make themselves look better and claim someone else's work as their own.

Quote :: and contributors then know that if they like their stuff to be copyright protected, they have to go elsewhere (perhaps some specially protected sub-net).

oh, really - i`should have to hide my pictures, written text etc. in a "protected subnet" in order to keep'em safe from thiefs and to enforce my rights?
Not a well considered idea in my opinion - and nothing else than a declaring of bancruptcy.....

Quote :: Would this make the net altogether a worse place, with lower-quality contributions, in the long run? Hardly.

but sure - a two class internet - public pages from zoos, breeders and so on without quality photos and valuable text - all these things (which might be potentially worth to be stolen) locked away in a virtual security container - just because authorities shouldn't be able to rule the one and only www we have?

Sorry, Klaus - i appreciated all your high quality postings here, but now....

I'm out here too.