# So my photos got stolen and used for ads



## im2c0ol (Jan 6, 2016)

I do photography as a hobby, sharing my work on the forums.
I found few ebay sellers used my pictures in their ads without my permission.

here are the links that my pictures got stolen
Extreme Xenon White LED License Plate lights For 2015 Subaru Legacy

Any my original picture
IMG_0118

Picture was stolen from this thread.
Im2c0oL's 15' Legacy CWP Build Log

Im2c0oL's 15' Legacy CWP Build Log


----------



## tirediron (Jan 6, 2016)

Well that sucks... have you contacted eBay and the vendor and requested the ad be removed?


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 6, 2016)

^^ what he said
eBay should take it off without hassle.

and .. nice car


----------



## im2c0ol (Jan 6, 2016)

I think I did sent the seller an email but didn't remember I get any response back. 
That was probably over haft a year ago.

I wonder who has similar issue, what's the best way to handle this correctly?


----------



## tirediron (Jan 6, 2016)

im2c0ol said:


> I think I did sent the seller an email but didn't remember I get any response back.
> That was probably over haft a year ago.
> 
> I wonder who has similar issue, what's the best way to handle this correctly?


 That doesn't make it sound like you're overly concerned...    The best way to handle this depends on what you want.  Are you just after an apology?  Do you want monetary recompense?  The ad removed?


----------



## im2c0ol (Jan 6, 2016)

Well they been using my picture to make money over a year now, so if it was you guys what do you guys suggest I should do? I wanna know what actions I could take against and see what they response.


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 6, 2016)

Send Ebay a DMCA Take-Down notice.


----------



## sm4him (Jan 6, 2016)

im2c0ol said:


> Well they been using my picture to make money over a year now, so if it was you guys what do you guys suggest I should do? I wanna know what actions I could take against and see what they response.



Well, first of all, I wouldn't have sent a request for the ad to be removed, and then let it all drop for six months.
At this point, I think I'd just contact Ebay, ask for the ad to be removed, and then STAY on top of it until the ad is actually gone--you essentially *allowed* the seller free use by not really pursuing this for so long--I'd just want to be done with it.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 6, 2016)

im2c0ol said:


> Well they been using my picture to make money over a year now, so if it was you guys what do you guys suggest I should do? I wanna know what actions I could take against and see what they response.


 You've got a few choices:  You can ask eBay to remove the ad for copyright violation, you can ask the seller to stop using your image and/or you can take legal action.  This means engaging a lawyer probably putting out a LOT of cash up-front.  You need to decide how much you've been hurt by this, and then consult a lawyer for REAL advice on your options.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 6, 2016)

A quick search and I think they are an eBay driven company ONLY.
meaning they don't seem to have a website (HIDsUSA - which is just a front for their eBay store), nor a store location, ie probably stock in their garage/basement.  I only checked briefly so they might actually exist.  

They do pay Florida sales tax, at least they collect it.

interesting .. they have a different address listed in eBay (Lehigh Acres, Florida)  than Facebook (9511 Fontainebleau Blvd  Miami, Florida)  which looks to be an apartment building via google maps with a phone number (305) 979-5016
the FB page links back to their eBay user page.

In other words, I don't think they really care.
So it would all depend upon how much you care that they have been using your photo of over 1/2 a year or over a year and what outcome you want.


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 6, 2016)

tirediron said:


> .....or you can take legal action.  This means engaging a lawyer .........



In the USA, one needs a USCO registration to take this route.  Without it, any copyright lawyer will not even bother talking to you.


----------



## im2c0ol (Jan 6, 2016)

I check ebay report no option for photo copyright.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 6, 2016)

Congratulations on shooting an image that's good enough to steal!


----------



## Buckster (Jan 6, 2016)

Here's a relevant thread that may interest the OP

Link: Should I Be Upset About This? | Photography Forum

Some relevant points to think about:

First thing to ask yourself is: What do you want?  For them to just stop using it?  To get credited as the photographer?  To get monetary compensation?

For the first two, you need to realize that most folks out there don't really care or take very seriously "requests" or even "demands" to stop using your image, because they know that most people won't do anything about it if they don't comply.  So, a lot of the time, they just ignore you, as it appears has happened to you in this case.  And now that they haven't heard anything more about it in 6 months or so, they're feeling even more confident that it's all good and they can just keep using it with no repercussions.  It also emboldens them to use others' photos for whatever purpose they want without asking any of those other photographers either.

They figure, quite correctly, that most people think that in order to legally pursue it, you'll need to put out some or even lots of bucks to an attorney up front, just like a moderator earlier in this thread stated.  If you just want them to stop using it or force them to give you credit as the photographer, that's true.  Attorneys don't work for free.

However, it ISN'T true as long as you're pursuing monetary compensation - the attorney simply takes his percentage cut of the settlement when the infringer pays.  Not that it matters much to the infringers out there, since they know that most people believe they'll need to pay attorney fees up front, especially when people seen as authority figures like, say, a moderator on a photography forum, says it, so the photographers don't think they can afford to pursue it.  Even more so when others chime in and agree that it's true you'll have to pay attorney fees up front just to get started.

While it's not actually true that it will necessarily cost attorney fees up front just to pursue monetary compensation (I've never had to pay a dime up front, as an example), with no guarantee you'd get anything out of it, it IS true that many attorneys will not take the case unless the image has been registered with the copyright office OR it was used by an entity that the attorney can expect to get big bucks from by taking the case.

In that latter case, the knowledgeable copyright attorney will get an emergency copyright registration in order to pursue the case.  In your case, you gave the infringer proof via email that you knew about it at least 6 months ago and, unfortunately, you only have a limited amount of time after finding out about the infringement to file for an emergency registration.  I don't recall off the top of my head what that time limit is, as it never comes up in my world - I register regularly.  Related, I also never contact an infringer, as anything said might be used against my interests, so I leave it all to the attorney.

Those with concerns about others using their work without permission regularly file their newest images with the copyright office.  Whether you want the infringer to just take it down and stop using it, or give you credit as the photographer, or you want to pursue monetary compensation, a registered copyright of the work gives you the legal teeth needed to keep from being ignored on the issue.


----------



## KmH (Jan 6, 2016)

Educate yourself; and be mindful of what you put online.
Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney
Two Easy Steps for Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement | NPPA
What’s An Infringement Worth? | Photo Attorney
http://www.photoattorney.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Excuses-excuses.pdf
The Fuss About Fair Use | Photo Attorney
Five Things You Can Do to Protect Your Online Images | Photo Attorney
Registering Your Copyrights Using the eCO System | NatureScapes.Net – The Resource for Nature Photographers


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 7, 2016)

im2c0ol said:


> I check ebay report no option for photo copyright.


eBay, Paypal, etc don't like to be bothered.  You have to call them and TALK to a person to get any response.

But truthfully it seems like you don't seem too bothered by this .. 6 to 12 months later.


----------



## im2c0ol (Jan 7, 2016)

At this point I just want him to take it down, I sent him an email yesterday. Didn't get a response back yet.


----------



## KmH (Jan 7, 2016)

> Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney
> *Option #4 – Prepare a Cease and Desist/Demand Letter Yourself*
> When you don’t want to alienate the infringer (the infringer is a potential client and/or appears to be an innocent infringer), you may want to contact the infringer to explain that the use is not authorized and either request payment of an appropriate license fee, a photo credit with a link to your website (as discussed above), or that the infringer cease use of the image. It’s best to do this in writing – a letter by surface mail seems to have more clout than email correspondence.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dave442 (Jan 7, 2016)

I think as the others noted, best option is contacting Paypal direct or, if contacting the party that posted the photo then best is to have your lawyer contact them.   

Their Paypal page has a lot of car shots and there is a good chance they pulled many of those off other sites. They even have a shot of another Subaru in a parking garage that almost looked like yours.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 10, 2016)

Buckster said:


> ...However, it ISN'T true as long as you're pursuing monetary compensation - the attorney simply takes his percentage cut of the settlement when the infringer pays.  Not that it matters much to the infringers out there, since they know that most people believe they'll need to pay attorney fees up front, especially when people seen as authority figures like, say, a moderator on a photography forum, says it, so the photographers don't think they can afford to pursue it.  Even more so when others chime in and agree that it's true you'll have to pay attorney fees up front just to get started....


Those darn photography forum moderators... always giving out bad advice...    Okay, putting aside the whole "If you actually act on legal advice you got on an Internet forum..." argument, you are correct Buckster, IF you can find a lawyer who will accept this case on a contingency-fee basis, then you shouldn't be out of pocket up front.  This may be an area where our two countries differ significantly, and I'm by no means an expert on US copyright law, but in Canada, based on the presentations I've attended by two well respected IP lawyers, most would not accept this as a contingency-fee case because the potential settlement would not be large enough to make it worth while for them, therefore it would an hourly fee with (typically) a ten-hour retainer up-front.


----------



## KmH (Jan 10, 2016)

Buckster said:


> . . . get an emergency copyright registration . . .


Can you provide a Copyright.gov link to how one gets an "emergency copyright registration" ?



> I've Submitted My Application, Fee, and Copy of My Work to the Copyright Office. Now What? (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office
> *How long does the registration process take, and when will I receive my certificate*?
> 
> The time the Copyright Office requires to process an application varies, depending on the number of applications the Office is receiving and clearing at the time of submission and the extent of questions associated with the application.
> ...


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

KmH said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > . . . get an emergency copyright registration . . .
> ...


Link: 
Special Handling (FAQ) | U.S. Copyright Office


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

tirediron said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > ...However, it ISN'T true as long as you're pursuing monetary compensation - the attorney simply takes his percentage cut of the settlement when the infringer pays.  Not that it matters much to the infringers out there, since they know that most people believe they'll need to pay attorney fees up front, especially when people seen as authority figures like, say, a moderator on a photography forum, says it, so the photographers don't think they can afford to pursue it.  Even more so when others chime in and agree that it's true you'll have to pay attorney fees up front just to get started....
> ...


I can only tell you about the things I've learned about this subject after studying several books on it, watching several seminar-type videos, and personally participating in the process of pursuing compensation for my own copyrighted works through legal representation, never on my own, never with me contacting or negotiating with the infringers directly.

Beyond a paper filing cabinet with contracts, agreements, and so forth for each case, I have a database I built and use for tracking and maintaining clarity on the nature and current state of each and every one of the copyright issues I have going on in my world.  At present, there are 223 separate cases in my database, each with their own tracking number.  More are added as I discover them and initiate the process anew.  Most are in some state of progress between initiation and resolution.  Last year 33 were resolved satisfactorily with payment to me and my representative.

My representative in these matters and I split the amount the infringer pays, 50-50.  So, when the infringer pays $5000.00, for example, my rep and I each deposit $2500.00.  Of those 33 settled cases from last year, the lowest amount an infringer paid was $50, which my rep and I split, for $25 each.  Like it or believe it or not, that's the actual lowest number in my database.

Now, that's not much, and one might easily believe that nobody would represent my interests for such a small amount, especially after reading the sorts of things so often found on internet forums like the post I'm responding to here, but there are a couple of factors to consider when looking at that small amount.

1. Neither my rep nor I had any real idea how much we'd end up with when I initiated the process after discovering the infringement.  That is always true, every time.  In the end, the amount was negotiated between my rep and the infringer, based on several factors, as I've explained in the other thread that I linked to.

2. My rep knows that I and my work represent an ongoing source of infringement cases to pursue.  As I mentioned, there are currently 223 cases in my database, and 33 of them were resolved last year alone, with many others still ongoing, or resolved before 2015.  Those 33 resolved cases last year yielded almost $16,000.00 for each of us, with the infringers obviously paying twice that.

Copyright attorneys worth their salt who are not trying to shyster their clients don't starve by taking on a case that only yields them $25 in the end, because they make up for it with cases that pay many times that amount.  That's true whether it's many cases from me, or many cases from many copyright owners and, again, one never knows what that final dollar amount will be, being up to negotiation between the parties, or a judge if it goes all the way to Federal Court.  Even those that may initially _*appear*_ to be worth very little can turn out to pay quite large sums, or vice-versa, and there's no way to know for sure in advance.

The broad brush strokes regarding attorneys, representatives, payments up front, big bucks to pursue infringement, that lawyers won't take on small-fry cases and all the rest of the stuff commonly seen on internet forums by people who talk like they know something, but have never actually pursued an infringement case themselves - are debunked quite handily by my own experiences with it all, and especially by the numbers I see flowing into my bank account month after month.

Don't believe me on these issues?  No skin off my wallet.  Another check arrived Saturday.  I'll be depositing it today.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 11, 2016)

Great income revenue stream Buckster.

In the case of the OP though, he has ONE photograph out there. Of course, he would have to start trolling all the sites with car photos to see if his shows up and creates a cyclical process with a lawyer for this.  So in your case it is well worth it.  

For the OP, he has 1 photo he has a complaint about.  A copyright attorney might not take that on a contingency fee basis unless he first did the copyright registration.  And then, it's been quite some time which is good for getting more money, or getting less.  but then I've never sued anyone for this so what do I know.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

astroNikon said:


> Great income revenue stream Buckster.
> 
> In the case of the OP though, he has ONE photograph out there. Of course, he would have to start trolling all the sites with car photos to see if his shows up and creates a cyclical process with a lawyer for this.  So in your case it is well worth it.
> 
> For the OP, he has 1 photo he has a complaint about.  A copyright attorney might not take that on a contingency fee basis unless he first did the copyright registration.  And then, it's been quite some time which is good for getting more money, or getting less.  but then I've never sued anyone for this so what do I know.


I can certainly appreciate that.  Consider my information purely informational.  

For those who pursue photography, it doesn't take long to have a large catalog of images.  And photos, like memes, spread.  When a photo gets popular, next thing you know it's being used by several different web sites, and from there it can end up anywhere in the real world of print, where it can be quite difficult to find.  And here's an odd thing: You just never know which one is gonna catch somebody's fancy for whatever reason.  When it happens, it's good to be prepared and to know how to handle it, and that starts with a registered copyright.  Take down, credit, or monetary, it's the legal teeth needed to enforce one's rights, if the copyright holder really want to be taken seriously.

Now, keep in mind that everything in that last paragraph applies to all photographers, from the lowliest hobbyist to the top pros.  Those in the know in marketing know that it's a lot easier to blow off a hobbyist who probably doesn't know any better, than a seasoned pro who does.  The key is not to let them, and to know that you don't have to.

To each his/her own, of course.  Each can use the information or not, given their own unique circumstances.  But it's at least good to know that it exists.  

It's good to run some searches on one's images once in a while, btw.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 11, 2016)

Buckster said:


> It's good to run some searches on one's images once in a while, btw.


how does one do this ?


----------



## weepete (Jan 11, 2016)

Google has a reverse image lookup function.

Reverse image search - Search Help


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

Yeah, just go to Google > Images, and drag any one of your photos into the search box.

Google Images


----------



## snowbear (Jan 11, 2016)

If you use Chrome, just right click on the image and :Search Google for image" is an option.  I also have the TinEye image search plug-in.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 11, 2016)

That is so cool.  Thanks.  I'm sure it will help the OP and others too.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 11, 2016)

Buckster said:


> ...The broad brush strokes regarding attorneys, representatives, payments up front, big bucks to pursue infringement, that lawyers won't take on small-fry cases and all the rest of the stuff commonly seen on internet forums by people who talk like they know something, but have never actually pursued an infringement case themselves - are debunked quite handily by my own experiences with it all, and especially by the numbers I see flowing into my bank account month after month.
> 
> Don't believe me on these issues?  No skin off my wallet.  Another check arrived Saturday.  I'll be depositing it today.


I would respectfully submit that one instance is hardly sufficient grounds to "debunk" anything, since for every rule there is an exception.  This may be a difference in the general approach to the practice of law between the US and Canada, it may be a difference in the way infringement cases are settled in the US and Canada, or it may be nothing more than an anomoly.  I have never had to pursue an infringement case myself, thankfully, but for one reason or another, I have some small experience with lawyers and the legal system, and most of the lawyers I have met do not strike me as so altruistic that they would champion the cause of someone whose image has been used on an eBay auction page.  Like all professionals, they want to be paid for their time, and while you may have an established relationship with a particular lawyer who is willing to do this based on your history, I find it difficult to believe that most would.  I could well be wrong...  just venturing an opinion.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

tirediron said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > ...The broad brush strokes regarding attorneys, representatives, payments up front, big bucks to pursue infringement, that lawyers won't take on small-fry cases and all the rest of the stuff commonly seen on internet forums by people who talk like they know something, but have never actually pursued an infringement case themselves - are debunked quite handily by my own experiences with it all, and especially by the numbers I see flowing into my bank account month after month.
> ...


"One Instance"?  Dude, I can turn you on to entire companies who use exactly the methodology I've described with LOTS of clients like me.  ZERO dollars up front, they pursue it, negotiate it, take all the way to Federal Court if necessary, and you each get half.

Noted New York Copyright attorney of the rich and famous, Ed Greenberg, says those companies and their lawyers don't pursue hard enough, and that a copyright attorney such as he can get a LOT more money out of an infringer.  Does he require money up-front?  I have no idea.  You'd have to contact him directly and ask.

Nonetheless, they DO exist.  Please stop.


----------



## Braineack (Jan 11, 2016)

jeez this was soooooooooooooooooooooooo hard:







How eBay protects intellectual property (VeRO)



> *How eBay protects intellectual property (VeRO)*
> We're committed to protecting the intellectual property rights of third parties and to providing our members with a safe place to buy and sell. We created the Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) Program so that intellectual property owners can easily report listings that infringe their rights.
> 
> We require that a rights owner be registered through VeRO before reporting items to us. Rights owners sign legally binding documents when reporting items to eBay.


----------



## KmH (Jan 11, 2016)

Buckster said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Buckster said:
> ...


Thanks!


----------



## tirediron (Jan 11, 2016)

Buckster said:


> "One Instance"?  Dude, I can turn you on to entire companies who use exactly the methodology I've described with LOTS of clients like me.  ZERO dollars up front, they pursue it, negotiate it, take all the way to Federal Court if necessary, and you each get half.
> 
> Noted New York Copyright attorney of the rich and famous, Ed Greenberg, says those companies and their lawyers don't pursue hard enough, and that a copyright attorney such as he can get a LOT more money out of an infringer.  Does he require money up-front?  I have no idea.  You'd have to contact him directly and ask.
> 
> Nonetheless, they DO exist.  Please stop.


 I didn't mean to imply that they didn't.  I was simply venturing *my opinion* that in this case, where the infringement hasn't (as far as I understand) cost the OP any money, and where the infringer is a potentially somewhat nebulous Internet company, many (most?) lawyers would require some form of retainer due to the likely low damages awarded and the difficulty in collecting.


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

tirediron said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > "One Instance"?  Dude, I can turn you on to entire companies who use exactly the methodology I've described with LOTS of clients like me.  ZERO dollars up front, they pursue it, negotiate it, take all the way to Federal Court if necessary, and you each get half.
> ...


You tried to make the case that my experiences with this are some kind of unique, one-off, extraordinary thing that are unlikely to be experienced by others.  It's not.  They do.  You were wrong about that.  There's no other way I know of to slice that.

*Your opinion* is wrong, and the folks who wander through won't know that unless it's pointed out that one of the most active authority figures on this forum is incorrect in *his opinions* about this particular subject.  Without that correction, *your opinion* will be taken as much more than just an opinion, and you will be propagating incorrect information to those who don't know any better.  Do you get that?  Do you understand that's my motivation here?  To set the record straight, and have the correct information made available, not to have an argument with you?

That said, I'm sorry to have to say it, but *your opinion* is wrong some more with this latest post.  To start with, it doesn't matter in the least if it hasn't "cost the OP any money".  That's just another myth that you're now perpetuating.  And that's not all you flubbed this time.

Look, you just don't know what you're talking about on this subject.  I hate to be so blunt, as I know how that's taken, but you're not taking the hints, so that's what I'm left with - blunt honesty.  From my point of view, you're trying to wing it, trying to use what you think is common sense in lieu of the actual knowledge and experience that you admit you don't have on this particular subject.

I get that cognitive dissonance can be a natural reaction to having one's beliefs challenged.  But reality doesn't care if someone's having a tough time accepting it.

For the 3rd time, please stop.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 11, 2016)

Well, clearly you're the expert and by virtue of the fact that you've said I'm wrong, I must be wrong.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jan 11, 2016)

OK it isn't really funny, but jeez.

John's opinion isn't wrong (or may not be right), his opinion is his opinion. Take it for what it's worth. I value his opinions because he is knowledgeable and offers suggestions in an appropriate professional way.

Buckster the impression I've gotten is that you've posted a zillion of your photos all over the internet. Seems sort of like tossing a line out there knowing there are plenty of fish in the pond, people who will take/steal photos. Most people probably are not going to be able to sit and fish all day, or keep tracking down violations.

I would suggest people look at Terms on any site they want to use. Think about why you're using a particular site, who do you want to be able to see your pictures? Learn about watermarking, learn about copyright, get informed about how to protect your work, etc. American Society of Media Photographers or PPA have information. (edit - And in the OP's situation I'd check on ebay what to do and contact them to stop your photo being used, then rethink how/where you're posting photos online.)


----------



## Buckster (Jan 11, 2016)

Offs


----------



## im2c0ol (Jan 12, 2016)

He reply to my email, asked if he can continue use the photo. I offer him to purchase the copy right, I'll take new photo for him. His reply:

*ear im2c0ol,*

honestly i just need 3 images where shows hids in your car, 3 images where shows led lights thats all i need. Let me know how much you want me to pay you for those 6 images?

- hidsusa

How much should I charge him? I want it affordable but not too cheap .


----------



## Braineack (Jan 12, 2016)

$0.


----------



## nathan cox (Jan 12, 2016)

$30-$40 you need to take more photos and that is $5 per a photo. You need to compare yourself to the stock photo sites that is why I think $30-$40.


----------



## KmH (Jan 12, 2016)

Don't sell your copyrights.
Sell him a use license valid for use on eBay only, for 1 year.

He sells his license plate lights for about @$25 each.
Sell him a use license for the 6 photos @ $25 each, or $150.

If after a year he wants to re-license the 6 photos for an additional year, he pays another $150.


----------



## nathan cox (Jan 12, 2016)

KmH said:


> Don't sell your copyrights.
> Sell him a use license valid for use on eBay only, for 1 year.
> 
> He sells his license plate lights for about @$25 each.
> ...



If I was selling the lights I would say "stuff the photographer I will rip off another person if I have to pay $150 a year" it matters on the person and how much they are making


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2016)

nathan cox said:


> If I was selling the lights I would say "stuff the photographer I will rip off another person if I have to pay $150 a year" it matters on the person and how much they are making


Legally,  he's already obliged to pay.


----------



## Braineack (Jan 13, 2016)

he's not going to pay $25 each, its doubtfull he'd pay $25 for all three he wants.  and there's no reason/benefit for you to deal with him.  You didnt shoot those pics to make money, youre not losing money for him using them, and you dont benefit from him using them as well.

Contact eBay's VeRO, have them pull the images, and move on with life.


----------



## KmH (Jan 13, 2016)

I too would have eBay yank the photographs.


----------



## opethian (Jan 13, 2016)

The moment we put things on internet its no longer ours alone  and people have mad Photoshop skills 
BTW what u guys do to protect such things? Watermarking?

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Trever1t (Jan 13, 2016)

how did you find your images?


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 13, 2016)

opethian said:


> The moment we put things on internet its no longer ours alone  and people have mad Photoshop skills
> BTW what u guys do to protect such things? Watermarking?
> 
> Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk



I make quarterly ritual sacrifices to Minerva. Typically a goat, although a few pigeons will suffice if there are no goats available at the time.  
thus far it has proven to be quite effective. 
in extreme cases, or if you have already had pictures stolen, I recommend a hecatomb.


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2016)

opethian said:


> The moment we put things on internet its no longer ours alone  and people have mad Photoshop skills
> BTW what u guys do to protect such things? Watermarking?
> 
> Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk



If you don't want it stolen, don't post it on the innernets.

Sent from MySmartphone using DumbFingers.


----------



## opethian (Jan 13, 2016)

480sparky said:


> opethian said:
> 
> 
> > The moment we put things on internet its no longer ours alone  and people have mad Photoshop skills
> ...


Exactly ... If we put things then should not complain others stealing it 

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2016)

opethian said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > opethian said:
> ...




Um.  No.  Theft is theft.   Preventing someone from stealing from me does not preclude me from complaining about theft.


----------



## opethian (Jan 13, 2016)

Then put a huge watermark at least which is so annoying that no one likes to steal ur pics 
I mean come on, if I'm not a professional n I can't prove I'm professional n someone stealing my image is affecting my business n I also have no watermark or identification on the image then legally it will be very hard to get damages from someone ... 
If u don't lock ur house then complain others have stolen from it. Put some degree of security on it 


Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## jsecordphoto (Jan 13, 2016)

opethian said:


> Then put a huge watermark at least which is so annoying that no one likes to steal ur pics
> I mean come on, if I'm not a professional n I can't prove I'm professional n someone stealing my image is affecting my business n I also have no watermark or identification on the image then legally it will be very hard to get damages from someone ...
> If u don't lock ur house then complain others have stolen from it. Put some degree of security on it
> 
> ...



Sounds like you've got it all figured out


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 13, 2016)

opethian said:


> Then put a huge watermark at least which is so annoying that no one likes to steal ur pics
> I mean come on, if I'm not a professional n I can't prove I'm professional n someone stealing my image is affecting my business n I also have no watermark or identification on the image then legally it will be very hard to get damages from someone ...
> If u don't lock ur house then complain others have stolen from it. Put some degree of security on it
> 
> ...



'Being a pro' and 'being in business' has _diddly-squat_ to do with infringement. The infringer profited from someone else's work.  It's just.... that.... simple.

In this case, it would be exceedingly EASY to prove they're the OP's images.  The mere fact that the infringer *admitted *it, for one.

Of course, taking legal steps usually involves registering the images since in the US you can't sue for infringement without it.


----------



## opethian (Jan 13, 2016)

I'm not trying to prove here something, I'm just saying someone misuses our things when they look like they don't belong to anyone
Kudos to the infringer who accepts to even accept his infringement but  it hardly happens in rest of the cases. But one thing is always common in such instances, we don't even register such "properties" to our own selves by simply watermarking them.
Anyway thanks for this healthy discussion guys, I learnt a lot n luky u guys that u even have some laws in your country about such things. 

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack (Jan 14, 2016)

opethian said:


> I like to hear myself talk




Yeah, we know.


----------



## jsecordphoto (Jan 14, 2016)

Braineack said:


> opethian said:
> 
> 
> > I like to hear myself talk
> ...



/thread


----------



## footballfan993 (Jan 15, 2016)

Buckster said:


> Yeah, just go to Google > Images, and drag any one of your photos into the search box.
> 
> Google Images


can you use images from a flash drive and drag and drop them in and look for them that way?


----------



## Buckster (Jan 15, 2016)

footballfan993 said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, just go to Google > Images, and drag any one of your photos into the search box.
> ...


I would guess yes, though I've never tried it.  Why don't you give it a shot and get back to us on that?  Seems like a pretty easy thing to try.


----------



## footballfan993 (Jan 16, 2016)

Buckster said:


> footballfan993 said:
> 
> 
> > Buckster said:
> ...


I just tried this, and used a photo from my flash drive, and my public facebook profile, but neither image turned up with any links, no links to my facebook page, website, nothing.


----------



## footballfan993 (Jan 16, 2016)

footballfan993 said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > footballfan993 said:
> ...


The photos that I tried were these ones:


----------



## tirediron (Jan 16, 2016)

I think there might be an issue with facebook.  I just tried a number of different images, and they turned up results here on TPF, on my website, and one or two other places, but NOT on facebook, and all of them are posted there as well.


----------



## footballfan993 (Jan 16, 2016)

tirediron said:


> I think there might be an issue with facebook.  I just tried a number of different images, and they turned up results here on TPF, on my website, and one or two other places, but NOT on facebook, and all of them are posted there as well.


Interesting, I'll have to toy around with it a bit more, it could be that I don't have a lot of photos up on various places. I'm not sure, but I will try to figure this out.


----------



## snowbear (Jan 16, 2016)

Maybe FB is blocking searches?
FWIW, Tyler, I didn't get a match on your photos from Google, TinEye, or IDQB or Sauce NAO searches.

If you use the Chrome browser, you just have to right click an image and you'll get the Google search as an option - no drag and drop.


----------



## thereyougo! (Jan 18, 2016)

footballfan993 said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I think there might be an issue with facebook.  I just tried a number of different images, and they turned up results here on TPF, on my website, and one or two other places, but NOT on facebook, and all of them are posted there as well.
> ...



Perhaps your Facebook privacy settings mean they don't come up in a google search?  Just a thought...


----------



## thereyougo! (Jan 18, 2016)

opethian said:


> Then put a huge watermark at least which is so annoying that no one likes to steal ur pics
> I mean come on, if I'm not a professional n I can't prove I'm professional n someone stealing my image is affecting my business n I also have no watermark or identification on the image then legally it will be very hard to get damages from someone ...
> If u don't lock ur house then complain others have stolen from it. Put some degree of security on it
> 
> ...



I've seen plenty of decent photos ruined by watermarks.  One guy on here used  to post some great images, he was from North Wales in UK.  The images would be good but the watermark always got in the way.  It's something of a catch 22.  Do it in a preventative way, and it ruins the image.  Do it so it's out of the way, and it is easy to crop out or clone out. 

Notwithstanding this, whether you are a pro making money from your images or not it is still theft, just as if you left your door open, someone walking in and stealing your stereo is still stealing it.  You are just as entitled to seek restitution from the offender even if your insurance company tells you that they won't pay out.  Theft is theft is theft.  Doesn't matter how it happened, it's still theft.


----------



## footballfan993 (Jan 18, 2016)

thereyougo! said:


> footballfan993 said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...


Thanks, didn't think of that i'll have to look at my Facebook settings too then.


----------



## Dave442 (Jan 18, 2016)

Great data from Buckster, thanks for sharing.
I have found lawyers much better at handing these issues. Having a business it seems like there is always a lawyer involved at some point and they are generally open to hearing about any other potential areas of income.


----------

