| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/11/2006 07:57:51 PM · #26 |
Even though he has stolen them I think it is childish to attack him with comments. For those that do you make the DPC community as a whole look like a bunch of people with pitchforks and that is not the way I want to be seen.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:01:38 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by rex:
Even though he has stolen them I think it is childish to attack him with comments. For those that do you make the DPC community as a whole look like a bunch of people with pitchforks and that is not the way I want to be seen. |
I disagree. If you stole a bunch of photos and are selling them and passing them off as your own, you deserve it.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:04:09 PM · #28 |
Just report it and let the proper people at smugmug handle it.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:04:48 PM · #29 |
| left pms with admins over there. |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:12:17 PM · #30 |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:14:40 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This suggests the user may not even be aware the photos are for sale ... and it is -- if you pardon the language -- a stupid way to have the default setting. |
That is what I suspected. There are a number of free gallery software packages that have an automatic option for printing. The prices on his/her gallery seem too low to suggest that he/she is actually attempting to sell them for profit and what little faith in humanity I have left hopes that people wouldn't be so silly to try.
Originally posted by rex:
Even though he has stolen them I think it is childish to attack him with comments. For those that do you make the DPC community as a whole look like a bunch of people with pitchforks and that is not the way I want to be seen. |
I agree. |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:22:59 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This suggests the user may not even be aware the photos are for sale ... and it is -- if you pardon the language -- a stupid way to have the default setting. |
That is what I suspected. There are a number of free gallery software packages that have an automatic option for printing. The prices on his/her gallery seem too low to suggest that he/she is actually attempting to sell them for profit and what little faith in humanity I have left hopes that people wouldn't be so silly to try.
Originally posted by rex:
Even though he has stolen them I think it is childish to attack him with comments. For those that do you make the DPC community as a whole look like a bunch of people with pitchforks and that is not the way I want to be seen. |
I agree. |
 |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:38:44 PM · #33 |
The prices are set to the default lowest amount. This means that even if he does sell any images, he would make no money from them at all. This doesn't make it okay, but it does seem to indicate that he's not intentionally trying to sell the images. Also, I didn't get the impression that he was trying to pass any of the ones he took from other people as his own. It just looks like a guy who likes collecting images and organizing them in his SmugMug galleries.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:49:22 PM · #34 |
Reply from the smugmug admins to my message:
"Thanks for writing. We just learned of this today. I've sent an email
requesting that copyright protected images be removed immediately."
I expect the issue will be cleared up soon. |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 08:56:10 PM · #35 |
1. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 8:28pm EDT
Good to know you're a no-talent thief. Anytime I want to take credit and money for someone else's work, I'll get in touch with you. You are a joke and give a bad name to REAL photographers that bust their asses for quality photos like the photographer of this image. Worthless bastard.
2. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 6:57pm EDT
what a loser.
3. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 6:42pm EDT
I bet you wish you were a photographer? To bad you are a thief! Stealing this image makes you a pathetic looser!!!
4. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 6:40pm EDT
I bet you wish you were a photographer? To damn bad you are a thief this image is not yours. You are a pathetic looser!!!
5. | made by: ThiefHater | on: Jun 11, 2006 5:48pm EDT
Just what do you think you are doing? ALL your images appear to be stolen. I guess you have no integrity. Making it even worse is that you are selling the pictures you stole. Some people are just lower than low.
6. | made by: agitated | on: Jun 11, 2006 4:24pm EDT
Few things worse in this world than a thief. Honestly. Very pathetic.
7. | made by: Arni | on: Jun 11, 2006 4:11pm EDT
//dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=166964
You are a freaking thief!!!!
8. | made by: babylon | on: Jun 11, 2006 4:07pm EDT
Excuse me, but you did not take this photo! that's me on the picture and my boyfriend shot it, and you're not him!
It was taken for a competition on dpchallenge.com and here is the link//dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=166964. Please remove this photo immediately from your gallery
Those are some real nasty comments. Yes the guy may have stolen them but at least be civil people.
GRAB YOUR PITCHFORKS
Message edited by author 2006-06-11 20:58:23.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 09:01:46 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by rex:
Those are some real nasty comments. Yes the guy may have stolen them but at least be civil people. |
Yes. Let's be civil. Let's also call this person "she" which by the portfolio is what appears to be the case. Someone mentioned that this person could be a teacher...yes, that's likely. Someone mentioned that this person appears to be feeding a blog...but didn't post the link...despite that, it appears that blogging is a likely reason for the gallery. She's been doing it for a long time. No arms were raised until it hit us here with our beloved images. Seems to me, that we ought to be just as vigilant with images from famous artists, map makers, government archives, etc...My personal kudos to the OP for bringing this to attention. (Now play nice.)
;-) |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 09:23:06 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by pidge:
By default, you can sell the pictures. You have to go and manually change to not make photos available to sell. At least, that's how it is with my account |
This suggests the user may not even be aware the photos are for sale ... and it is -- if you pardon the language -- a stupid way to have the default setting. |
From Smugmug's TOS: "You represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the Content (including without limitation Media) that you post; that use of the Content you supply does not violate these Terms of Use and will not cause injury to any person or entity; and that you will indemnify Smugmug for all claims resulting from Content you supply."
I see no fault here in having the default setting as "available for sale." Everyone knows when they sign up they aren't supposed to upload something unless they own the copyright to it.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 09:26:14 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by pidge:
By default, you can sell the pictures. You have to go and manually change to not make photos available to sell. At least, that's how it is with my account |
This suggests the user may not even be aware the photos are for sale ... and it is -- if you pardon the language -- a stupid way to have the default setting. |
From Smugmug's TOS: "You represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the Content (including without limitation Media) that you post; that use of the Content you supply does not violate these Terms of Use and will not cause injury to any person or entity; and that you will indemnify Smugmug for all claims resulting from Content you supply."
I see no fault here in having the default setting as "available for sale." Everyone knows when they sign up they aren't supposed to upload something unless they own the copyright to it. |
Unless of course they don't read the ToS.... ;) |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 09:33:10 PM · #39 |
You know, you can't sell images on smugmug without a pro account. I see one of the galleries is called "Me" and features a bald guy, sure we're talkin' female here?
I agree with the assessment on the default/setting, photos automatically for sale at the consumer's price, portfolio or gallery pricing not customized.
If it was feeding a blog, the galleries should be private with external links enabled.
The user has but to delete those comments, and obviously doesn't have the "enable comment approval" feature enabled.
I'd feel a lot better about his "collection" if he'd captioned them in any way. Plenty of the images have sigs or chops on them, so likely a blogger.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 09:34:53 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by rex:
3. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 6:42pm EDT
I bet you wish you were a photographer? To bad you are a thief! Stealing this image makes you a pathetic looser!!!
4. | made by: Guest | on: Jun 11, 2006 6:40pm EDT
I bet you wish you were a photographer? To damn bad you are a thief this image is not yours. You are a pathetic looser!!!
|
Oy. At least spell "loser" correctly, please. As if the vitriol didn't make us look bad enough... |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:21:51 PM · #41 |
I emailed Smugmug on this - whether they care to do anything or not who knows - but he has watermarked Corbis images up there and you can put them in your cart...someone should tell corbis - they got the legal means to put a cease and desist on this guy better than anyone here.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:24:29 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
I emailed Smugmug on this - whether they care to do anything or not who knows - but he has watermarked Corbis images up there and you can put them in your cart...someone should tell corbis - they got the legal means to put a cease and desist on this guy better than anyone here. |
KaDi posted a response from them earlier. |
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:25:59 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by mk:
KaDi posted a response from them earlier. |
Man, this reading of threads via osmosis is not working...i guess i have to go back to the old method - and read them.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:26:03 PM · #44 |
all good points. but. when i blogged regularly (sadly, the dpc addiction has put paid to that) i would always credit any images, unless they were uncreditable. but i always stated in my blog that they weren't mine. not, however, in the storage area where i kept any. so... perhpas the blog should be seen first. and perhaps he/she doesn't realise the shots are for sale?
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:27:54 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by elemess:
Oy. At least spell "loser" correctly, please. As if the vitriol didn't make us look bad enough... |
Ha. You beat me to it. I think the lose/loose misspelling is one of the most common I see on the forums.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:34:18 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by L2:
... I see no fault here in having the default setting as "available for sale." Everyone knows when they sign up they aren't supposed to upload something unless they own the copyright to it. |
Sorry, but I can't agree with "available for sale" being the default. Obviously someone is making a profit, however small, off the sale of the primts. I find that default to be counterintuative. Having the default set to selling but not requireing the user to set prices allows smugmug to earn undeserved profits from persons who were not intending to sell prints but didn't know how the default was set.
I thought that smugmug was a reputable website. But I am beginning to think that was a misteke because -
1. The policy about reporting infringements, as quoted earlier in this thread by Neuferland, is overly burdonsome on the person complaining and favors the offender. It seems designed more to protect smugmug from lawsuits than to protect copyright owners.
2. Their response to the complaint was to contact the account holder and request removal of the illegal items. When the violations are so obvious as the Time cover and shots of celebrities the response should heve been to block access to the account first, and then contact the holder. Or to simply close the account as arnit demanded.
3. Default should be no selling unless specifically enabled.
They have all the right requirements and disclaimers in their ToS, but apparently no one's minding the store. They can say they respect property rights but they have enabled this image theft, and by profiting from sales of the stolen images, are complicit in the crime.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2006 11:37:34 PM · #47 |
They should not be for sale.
What if this guy is a middle school teacher (like I read in this thread) and teaches photography? Maybe he is using them to show his class how to take good photo's?
Just looking at the glass half full.
He should ask for permission for sure! |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 12:15:27 AM · #48 |
I have had great support from Smugmug. I am sure they will take care of this. I have been in touch with Andy over there and I am sure it will be dealt with. They have always been helpful to me when I had an issue.
I understand the frustration behind this...but we all know that our pictures are subject to this kind of thing when we put them on the net.
I know some of mine have been stolen using the printscreen button. Even though they are right click protected.
Not ideal...but it is what we have to deal with. If this guy had only a few pics and was representing them as his own....it would be far worse.
If he has the default prices up....I am sure it was a mistake.
Still...he should not be doing it.
Barry |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 12:51:47 AM · #49 |
I have a smugmug page and right now they seem very overwelmed with a stats issue. They needed to shut down all the stats for all pages and lots of users are very upset (NOT ME). They are trying to fix the problem instead of putting a bandaid on it and it is taking longer than expected. These people do not seem to stop with the fury of constant upgrades an perks added all the time. It truly seems to be a great outfit and like I said...they are going day and night trying to fix this problem that has upset many users. I would hope that they ban this user asap and keep him for stealing others images. As for the upset comments.... Smugmug users will get an email saying that they have a new comment... If they do make sales, you need to go into the smugmug control panel and know exactly were to look or you will miss how much you make. I am not trying to make any excuses because I only know what I am writing. Please do not me so quick to slap down smugmug. They hit a major growing pain.
I do believe this user deserves these comments if he does not put any contact info and knowingly is selling images. I am sure he has no idea what is going on or he would have removed the comments. When you make each section, the default for printing is set to on, or people can order prints. He will probably be very sorry and ment no harm... We have a right to be upset, but he probably just does not know any better.....
Who knows....NOT US! |
|
|
|
06/12/2006 01:09:50 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by L2:
... I see no fault here in having the default setting as "available for sale." Everyone knows when they sign up they aren't supposed to upload something unless they own the copyright to it. |
Sorry, but I can't agree with "available for sale" being the default. Obviously someone is making a profit, however small, off the sale of the primts. I find that default to be counterintuative. Having the default set to selling but not requireing the user to set prices allows smugmug to earn undeserved profits from persons who were not intending to sell prints but didn't know how the default was set.
I thought that smugmug was a reputable website. But I am beginning to think that was a misteke because -
1. The policy about reporting infringements, as quoted earlier in this thread by Neuferland, is overly burdonsome on the person complaining and favors the offender. It seems designed more to protect smugmug from lawsuits than to protect copyright owners.
2. Their response to the complaint was to contact the account holder and request removal of the illegal items. When the violations are so obvious as the Time cover and shots of celebrities the response should heve been to block access to the account first, and then contact the holder. Or to simply close the account as arnit demanded.
3. Default should be no selling unless specifically enabled.
They have all the right requirements and disclaimers in their ToS, but apparently no one's minding the store. They can say they respect property rights but they have enabled this image theft, and by profiting from sales of the stolen images, are complicit in the crime. |
#2 isn't largely different from what we would do here. When a copyright violation is brought to Langdon's attention, he usually sends an email asking it to be removed. Don't know what we would do if it wasn't (I guess hide it or something) because the "offenders" have always complied. Usually within minutes of the request.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/30/2025 01:37:54 PM EDT.
