Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Probably not the first time this has been raised, but here goes anyway. I have just discovered that one of my photos was used last year for the same news story in eight online news outlets so I sent all the links to the SS Compliance team who confirmed the source was not Shutterstock, and told me that as I owned the copyright I could send them a take-down notice - not very helpful as the story is history now. Only four sites had contact details so I have emailed them. If I was to pursue claims and in the unlikely event I receive payment do I need to share with SS?

This is how the image appears in the news stories:

32005418-8632275-image-a-10_1597564684811.jpg.b9bf6978604606fbf8fc4fd44d9dd890.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rob Lavers LRPS said:

Probably not the first time this has been raised, but here goes anyway. I have just discovered that one of my photos was used last year for the same news story in eight online news outlets so I sent all the links to the SS Compliance team who confirmed the source was not Shutterstock, and told me that as I owned the copyright I could send them a take-down notice - not very helpful as the story is history now. Only four sites had contact details so I have emailed them. If I was to pursue claims and in the unlikely event I receive payment do I need to share with SS?

 

That's a tough one.
On the one hand, it has been illegally downloaded from Shutterstock. So they should pay them and then Shutterstock will pay you.
But then Shutterstock and not you should write to that firm.
In cases that it happened directly from a photographer, a fine may be imposed on top of that in the Netherlands and I suspect also in other countries.
If Shutterstock does not act, they will have a hard time claiming the money. Then you too could charge for the time you spend doing it while they are supposed to.
In my case it would be even more difficult, because my photos are also at AS and Alamy. Then you also have to find out from which site it was obtained.
I wouldn't give them anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's a syndicated story, one download. Just in case that was part of the question? I refused to allow AP one of my images, because someone more experienced said, sure, you'll get your photo in hundreds of newspapers, but they only pay you once. Ah my chance at fame and for a $25 fortune I decided to say no thank you?

Make sure that the source of the original article that was distributed, didn't have a legitimate license.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Doug McLean said:

If it had sold before, they may have grabbed it from some web site that obtained it legally? This happens all the time.

I would forget the takedown notice (it has already been used) and just send them an invoice.

 

Yes, that's a better point and what probably happened. I gave up looking for mine in use, except when it's for DACS payments.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, HodagMedia said:

Yes, that's a better point and what probably happened. I gave up looking for mine in use, except when it's for DACS payments.

 

 

12 hours ago, Doug McLean said:

If it had sold before, they may have grabbed it from some web site that obtained it legally? This happens all the time.

I would forget the takedown notice (it has already been used) and just send them an invoice.

 

Only four sites had contact details so I have emailed them. If I was to pursue claims and in the unlikely event I receive payment do I need to share with SS?

This is what Rob asks. And than I say: 'No. Shutterstock did nothing to get their money'..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strewth! What an abuse of an editorial photo! Trouble is that the photo is just so attractive for such a business. I take it that all restaurants and wine bars in Lisbon are now open as normal??

 

Edit: Nope. I see they're not......"Restaurants and cafes may only operate on a take-away or home delivery basis". Must be a tour of take-aways and bring your own bottle then. 🙃

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after messaging the four sites with contact details I received one reply - a polite apology sent straight away and taking down the photo on their site. That site is in Lagos Nigeria, the others haven’t responded which doesn’t put the ethical standards of US and U.K. news media in a good light. Lagos confirmed it was from a news feed which was probably used by all of them, and did promise to be more careful in future. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alexandre Rotenberg said:

Was taken 2 years ago

I was referring to the advertiser who is effectively offering a service (tour of restaurants and wine bars) which is not presently allowed...all the dates and prices are for March 2021.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...