Jump to content
Saurav022

Editorial image getting stolen

Recommended Posts

I have an editorial image (ID: 1119144278), that is being stolen from google images. A big travel operator used it on their website and somehow it made to the top of google image search. It is now being used commercially in various places. I mailed Shutterstock regarding it, but so far nothing has happened. I wonder what needs to be done to stop this theft. @jeffde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Saurav022 said:

I have an editorial image (ID: 1119144278), that is being stolen from google images. A big travel operator used it on their website and somehow it made to the top of google image search. It is now being used commercially in various places. I mailed Shutterstock regarding it, but so far nothing has happened. I wonder what needs to be done to stop this theft. @jeffde

so you sold it, and now people are stealing that version?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Scorsby said:

How many times has it sold because Google has it a lot.  Including a YouTube account as a small composit on its front page. 

But it has been used a lot.

I found 4 more you tube videos, only Shutterstock can confirm who purchased it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure you can expect any help from Shutterstock here. They only would take actions if one of their customers misused a licence they purchased from them, for example if a company purchased an editorial licence and used it commercially. However, the theft took place somewhere completely different, on a travel operator page and shutterstock has nothing to do with that! Your only option would be to persuade each single site that uses your image without having bought a licence legally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Firn said:

I am not sure you can expect any help from Shutterstock here. They only would take actions if one of their customers misused a licence they purchased from them, for example if a company purchased an editorial licence and used it commercially. However, the theft took place somewhere completely different, on a travel operator page and shutterstock has nothing to do with that! Your only option would be to persuade each single site that uses your image without having bought a licence legally.

I wonder if a travel operator can use a editorial license because it would violate Shutterstock terms and conditions (https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/Why-is-some-content-marked-Editorial-Use-Only?l=en_US&fs=RelatedArticle).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Saurav022 said:

I wonder if a travel operator can use a editorial license because it would violate Shutterstock terms and conditions (https://www.shutterstock.com/support/article/Why-is-some-content-marked-Editorial-Use-Only?l=en_US&fs=RelatedArticle).

they can use it in a non commercial way.  So a page that describes the festival is likely fine and probably can get away with a "for more information with visiting, please contact us at xxxxxx@xx.com.  For example every travel guidebooks use editorial images, and most have now linked to commercial bookings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jean-francois.me said:

they can use it in a non commercial way.  So a page that describes the festival is likely fine and probably can get away with a "for more information with visiting, please contact us at xxxxxx@xx.com.  For example every travel guidebooks use editorial images, and most have now linked to commercial bookings

Ok, I get that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saurav022 said:

Till now 28 times, but the main theft took place in the months of May and June (a festival happens there), when it was sold only once.

How do you know it’s stolen? Couldn’t someone have downloaded it from Shutterstock in January and used it a few months later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ricoh Mirai User Club said:

How do you know it’s stolen? Couldn’t someone have downloaded it from Shutterstock in January and used it a few months later?

If it is an editorial image the image needs to be credited back to Shutterstock/the contributor. If it's not it's either stolen or the person using it broke the licence agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Firn said:

If it is an editorial image the image needs to be credited back to Shutterstock/the contributor. If it's not it's either stolen or the person using it broke the licence agreement.

But in the real world images often aren’t given the proper credits, many outlets only credit Shutterstock and others give no credit. If I chased up every instance of my not being given a proper credit, I’d have no time to upload images and probably go insane. Unless it’s clearly been stolen, I think it’s best to just move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who steal, steal all the time. It can be understood by looking at the website, as each and every image there has been stolen. Also, some of the thieves have credited that travel operator as the image source, which further confirmed my suspicion. Few newspapers are also using the exact same cropped resolution as the one used by the travel operator. For those who haven't given image source, only Shutterstock can confirm whether they have really purchased it or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Saurav022 said:

For those who haven't given image source, only Shutterstock can confirm whether they have really purchased it or not. 

Good luck getting Shutterstock’s cooperation, it will be interesting to see if they’re concerned or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Saurav022 said:

Those who steal, steal all the time. It can be understood by looking at the website, as each and every image there has been stolen. Also, some of the thieves have credited that travel operator as the image source, which further confirmed my suspicion. Few newspapers are also using the exact same cropped resolution as the one used by the travel operator. For those who haven't given image source, only Shutterstock can confirm whether they have really purchased it or not. 

If the image was lifted off a site that published it after buying a license, then Shutterstock has nothing to do with it. You'd have to personally go after each suspicious looking site and demand they show you their proof of purchase. If you have the time, go sue the whole lot of them. Would make a good landmark case to alert the rest of the world that stealing images off google is not legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2019 at 8:15 PM, Milo J said:

If the image was lifted off a site that published it after buying a license, then Shutterstock has nothing to do with it. You'd have to personally go after each suspicious looking site and demand they show you their proof of purchase. If you have the time, go sue the whole lot of them. Would make a good landmark case to alert the rest of the world that stealing images off google is not legal.

That's what I am doing now. I am sending e-mails to suspicious websites asking them to confirm the license. If they do not reply back, I am filing a DMCA in google against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there are several that cannot prove their purchase, would you have the time and inclination to start a lawsuit big enough to hit the media? I know there already have been a couple, but apparently people still tend to "forget".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a related topic that's featured in Sarah Lysecki's article in the blog: "How an Illustration of a Leopard Turned Controversy into Compassion"

It's not totally clear from the article whether the leopard art was bought legitimately from Shutterstock, or "lifted" from somewhere else where it was being used legally under copyright license. It seems that after being contacted by a stranger in Taiwan (who initially had taken credit for her artwork), a Russian artist's response was to be forgiving, and she was then so overcome with compassionate generosity that she donated a bunch of additional artwork to the intellectual property bandit, thus leaving everyone who heard the story with a warm fuzzy feeling inside.  There are probably some additional wrinkles to the story that aren't covered in the article.  But....

I'm not sure what message is being sent to all of us hard working contributors here.  Perhaps there's no "teachable moment" implied in the blog article: it's just a simple human interest story that shows the depths of one artist's kindness and generosity, for the rest of us to marvel at.  That's cool.  Plus, who doesn't want to save leopard cats, right?  Lots of good is being done here.

Or perhaps it was a smart business move:  Oops, an egg got broken when you took credit for my work... Well, nyet to worry: I've got a bunch more eggs, so let's all make a big tasty omelette together, and everyone wins. Katya gets a writeup, a bunch of likes on social media, and people contact her for illustration work... oh, and leopard cats get saved from extinction. 

I get that.  Promo brings in projects.  Volunteerism is virtuous.

But I still have nagging doubts about the way this anecdote is presented in the article.  Like a lot of other SS contributors, I have stumbled across my work online before, being used without my permission, being sold, or being given away for free.  Not once has my heart welled up with compassion leading me to shower the intellectual property thieves with additional works of art.  This business is hard work, and we all work hard for what we get.

We're at a place right now where literally billions of people need to be educated on this topic of IP and copyright, so that the content creators of the world can afford to put food on their tables.  Sure let's save the leopard cats, but can we also save the artists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2019 at 7:18 PM, Milo J said:

If there are several that cannot prove their purchase, would you have the time and inclination to start a lawsuit big enough to hit the media? I know there already have been a couple, but apparently people still tend to "forget".

I do not have the time, money or resources to file a lawsuit against 50 plus websites. Also copyright laws are complicated and there is a term called 'fair use' that is used to protect the thieves. https://petapixel.com/2018/07/02/court-rules-copying-photos-found-on-internet-is-fair-use/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mott Jordan said:

We're at a place right now where literally billions of people need to be educated on this topic of IP and copyright, so that the content creators of the world can afford to put food on their tables.  Sure let's save the leopard cats, but can we also save the artists?

A lot of people do it purposely because 90% of the time they do not get caught. 

I am not willing to believe that daily mail did not know about copyright http://gakuran.com/daily-mail-used-my-photos-without-permission-and-without-payment/https://expertphotography.com/the-daily-mail-stole-my-photos-i-got-paid/

Another recent case of image theft (http://www.jasonrweingart.com/blog/brent-shavnore-astonishing-case-of-image-thefthttps://petapixel.com/2019/09/11/photographer-accuses-digital-artist-of-photo-theft-calls-him-thief-liar/)

Share this post


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...