My Picture Was Stolen!
Kris Dockter
boy, am I fuming! I suppose in time, I will calm down, but I remember
when I took this picture, the time I spent making sure everthing was
in its place.
Anyway, my auction with my picture:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=300&item=2086801394
The THIEF:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=20621&item=2086832047
Thoughts? Suggestions? Nasty e-mail to the thief? :-)
Thanks for listening.
Mike
news:bbf39b74.03010...@posting.google.com...
Look at it this way - copying is the best form of flattery there is.
Next time put a watermark on your image, that way if anyone steals it, they
advertise you for free :-)
Mike
--
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin
without reading them."
McQualude
> http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/vero-program.html
Do I understand correctly, that you just have to report a violation and you
are a VERO member? That seems to be what it says. I thought that you had to
put something on your 'me' page.
--
McQualude
Intr...@spiritone.com
wrote:
Check and see if they are using your photo from your site.
If so, change the photo to something funny or nasty...
Then rename the right one and use that and use a watermark next time
:)
David Hopper
>
>Look at it this way - copying is the best form of flattery there is.
No, it's the sign of a lazy bum.
Check his 'me' page - he is into photography. Kinda ironic...
--
David - WD4JKH
Valid email: no-...@springmail.com
Deborah Stevenson,,,
>Okay, I realize I'm not the first person to have this happen to, but
>boy, am I fuming! I suppose in time, I will calm down, but I remember
>when I took this picture, the time I spent making sure everthing was
>in its place.
People have posted the VeRO link, but I thought pictures fell under the
new NODI thing. If you search the group's archives for NODI you might
well find the link for it.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
sirk
something that he bought from you?
I mean how many people sell the same model Hanging Gift Wrapper
Organizers on Ebay?
Also, what is wrong some of you sellers? It's like you constantly
look for competing sellers and try to sabotage their sales. Focus on
your own Ads and money will come to you. Ignore what other people do.
If you spend all your time trying to sabotage other people's auctions
you will simply waste time that you could be using selling new items.
Also, what goes around comes around. Be nice and do business.
Fred A. Murphy
On 6-Jan-2003, "Mike" <c...@tele2.co.uk> wrote:
> Next time put a watermark on your image, that way if anyone steals it,
> they advertise you for free :-)
Like they're doing for iPix? :^)
--
"My family's coat of arms ties in back. Is this normal?"
Fred A. Murphy
On 6-Jan-2003, krisd...@hotmail.com (Kris Dockter) wrote:
> Thoughts? Suggestions? Nasty e-mail to the thief? :-)
Whatever you did worked. He's pulled the auction. I imagine iPix wouldn't
take lightly to having their pix reproduced. That might be the best
reporting route in this type of case.
Don Lancaster
Use NODI per http://www.tinaja.com/glib/moreebay.pdf
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
voice: (928)428-4073 email: d...@tinaja.com fax 847-574-1462
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Don Lancaster
Clearly stating your IP rights on your About Me page enormously
strengthens your case against theft.
Mondy
Like so
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2085435735
Kris Dockter
No, this person wasn't a former client.
There are usually 1-10 hanging gift wrap organizers for sale on ebay
at any one time. They vary slightly in style sometimes.
I am not in anyway try to sabotage this person. They are welcomed to
compete against me, but why copy my picture? You can get "canned"
pictures of this item on the internet. I chose to make a unique
picture of this because as my auction states, I have one personally.
Also, don't many sellers simply scan the competition like I do?? I
have to find out if I can even afford to sell my items. I've totally
struck out on some items simply because others can afford to sell them
much cheaper than I can.
And some follow-up. I sent the seller in question a nice, calm note
explaining what they did was wrong and pointed them to a VERO link. I
did not suggest any corrective action, but they voluntarily ended the
auction. I really didn't mean for that to happen. They wrote back
and apologized. I sent her a note saying ending the auction wasn't
necessary but instead she could come up with her own photo or put a
note in her auction acknowledging the photo as mine. I ended my note
with "Happy Selling!".
And finally, it must seem like I have a ton of time on my hands to put
so much effort into this. I am a small time seller so I do have the
time to put this much effort into one item. And if this happens
again, I won't get nearly as "heated" as this time, the first time I'm
aware of.
Again, thanks for listening.
sirk <si...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<64ek1vk2n872m7a49...@4ax.com>...
Miernik
> boy, am I fuming! I suppose in time, I will calm down, but I remember
> when I took this picture, the time I spent making sure everthing was
> in its place.
He didn't steal it - your picture is still there!
The fact that he copied it should make you happy that someone likes your
work. That somene thinks that it is good enough to be put on his site,
that someone thinks that the picture is better that he could have made
yourself. Finally he made a backup copy of it, so your great work does
not get lost even it your hard disk got destroyed.
When I make something for which I spend much effort and time, the
greatest pleasure comes when I can share it with others. As long as of
course is doesn't cost me any more if I share it with someone.
Think about it. It's like GNU: http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html
--
Miernik ____________________________________________________
___ ICQ: 4004001 ___/___ tel.: +48608233394 ___/ mailto:mie...@ctnet.pl
No Iraq war! http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/iraq/invadeIraq082702.html
Please call the White House +1-202-456-1111 or fax +1-202-456-2461 and say no!
Fred A. Murphy
On 7-Jan-2003, Miernik <mie...@ctnet.pl> wrote:
> The fact that he copied it should make you happy that someone likes your
> work. That somene thinks that it is good enough to be put on his site,
> that someone thinks that the picture is better that he could have made
> yourself. Finally he made a backup copy of it, so your great work does
> not get lost even it your hard disk got destroyed.
So if I pay a professional photographer $100 to spend two hours producing
the best possible picture of my item for sale, I should be thrilled that
someone too cheap to buy a camera steals his work and my money and gets the
same expert restults?
Sorry, not buying. Now if he were to have the courtesy to ask first, that
might be different, depending on circumstances.
copper color
Boy, are you really sure it's worth the time? The picture really isn't that
good...a bit dark, hard to see how many pockets, etc. When a picture is
like that, and I realize that not everyone has the time or talent to photo
and edit the pictures, then the description really has to "take up the
slack". Yours doesn't...no dimensions, no number of spaces, no mention of
how many rolls of paper are being held in that middle section, etc.
Joe Chung
>> Okay, I realize I'm not the first person to have this happen
>> to, but boy, am I fuming! I suppose in time, I will calm
>> down, but I remember when I took this picture, the time I
>> spent making sure everthing was in its place.
>
> He didn't steal it - your picture is still there!
>
> When I make something for which I spend much effort and time,
> the greatest pleasure comes when I can share it with others. As
> long as of course is doesn't cost me any more if I share it
> with someone.
>
> Think about it. It's like GNU:
> http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html
That's a big misstatement of the GNU project and what it stands for.
Sharing implies consent.
The spirit of GNU's argument is that software authors should give
their software away; such a conscious act would imply consent on
the authors' part.
As far as we know, the OP did not give consent.
Borrowing without asking, is stealing.
-jc
Fred A. Murphy
On 7-Jan-2003, Richard Hunter <returntosender@ddressunknown> wrote:
> >Sorry, not buying. Now if he were to have the courtesy to ask first,
> >that might be different, depending on circumstances.
>
> devil's advocate:
> and i'm not buying it that you spent $100 to produce a picture of a
> hanging bag of some sort. :)
For all we know, he spent an hour finding all the goodies to fill the
pockets and make it look nice.
In any case, common courtesy says the other seller should ask first. Some
people don't care, others don't care as long as they're asked.
Fred A. Murphy
On 7-Jan-2003, "copper color" <coppe...@att.net> wrote:
> Boy, are you really sure it's worth the time? The picture really isn't
> that good...a bit dark, hard to see how many pockets, etc. When a picture
> is
> like that, and I realize that not everyone has the time or talent to photo
> and edit the pictures, then the description really has to "take up the
> slack". Yours doesn't...no dimensions, no number of spaces, no mention of
> how many rolls of paper are being held in that middle section, etc.
That Picasso isn't that good. Lopsided face, oversized ear, misplaced eye.
Maybe I should be allowed to take it home and hang it on my wall.
Quality is not the issue. Effort is.
Don Lancaster
>
> devil's advocate:
> and i'm not buying it that you spent $100 to produce a picture of a
> hanging bag of some sort. :)
>
> --
> good boys go to heaven, but bad boys go everywhere!
> -anonymous
Devil is not even wrong.
We easily spend that much billable time on certain images.
Extra photo effort dramatically improves your eBay results.
Don Lancaster
>
> On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:15:46 -0700, Don Lancaster <d...@tinaja.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Clearly stating your IP rights on your About Me page enormously
> >strengthens your case against theft.
>
> registration certificate for my Las Vegas photo CD.
>
> I posted a scan of it on the auction page, and will be doing so for my
> other products as the certificates come in. I haven't seen anyone else
> claiming to own copyrights to their products do this, I wonder why?
> It's only $30 to register.
Because registration represents a net loss of $30.00.
Any time an original work is rendered in tangible form, it is
automatically copyrighted in the US at no charge.
The only good your registration certificate is that, when hung on any
east facing Nebraska wall, they seem to prevent walrus attacks.
None
Are you sure it's not you who is the "thief"?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=20443&item=2086801463
I suppose you're the photographer of this shot too?
Deborah Stevenson,,,
>Vic wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 21:15:46 -0700, Don Lancaster <d...@tinaja.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Clearly stating your IP rights on your About Me page enormously
>> >strengthens your case against theft.
>>
>> I finally (after 8 months) received my Library of Congress copyright
>> registration certificate for my Las Vegas photo CD.
>>
>> I posted a scan of it on the auction page, and will be doing so for my
>> other products as the certificates come in. I haven't seen anyone else
>> claiming to own copyrights to their products do this, I wonder why?
>> It's only $30 to register.
>Because registration represents a net loss of $30.00.
>Any time an original work is rendered in tangible form, it is
>automatically copyrighted in the US at no charge.
However, registration enables recovery of damages that the automatic
copyright doesn't.
It's not likely to be worth it for auction photos themselves, but since
Vic is selling a product with copyrighted yet tantalizingly borrowable
material, it may make some sense for him.
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Fred A. Murphy
On 8-Jan-2003, "None" <None@ebay> wrote:
> Are you sure it's not you who is the "thief"?
>
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=20443&item=2086801463
>
> I suppose you're the photographer of this shot too?
There's a difference between using what I assume is a manufacturer's shot to
sell that manufacturer's product, and using someone else's picture to sell
your own product.
I don't think even Disney objects to people scanning a cover of a comic to
sell it, and they are very big on copyright protection.
Miernik
>
> Sharing implies consent.
>
> The spirit of GNU's argument is that software authors should give
> their software away; such a conscious act would imply consent on
> the authors' part.
>
> As far as we know, the OP did not give consent.
Yes, I fully agree with you here. I wrote this post to encourage Kris
Dockter to licence his next picture under the GNU/FDL licence.
> Borrowing without asking, is stealing.
I must disagree here. To steal means to take someone's property away
from the owner, making it unavialable to him. Stealing would arise if
the someone would break into the server and delete the picture from
there.
Read: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#TOCTheft
Especially this part:
"So it is pertinent to mention that the legal system--at least in the
US--rejects the idea that copyright infringement is ``theft.'' Copyright
apologists are making an appeal to authority... and misrepresenting what
the authority says."
Joe Chung
>> Borrowing without asking, is stealing.
>
> I must disagree here. To steal means to take someone's property away
> from the owner, making it unavialable to him. Stealing would arise if
> the someone would break into the server and delete the picture from
> there.
>
> Read: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#TOCTheft
As another poster mentioned, copyright law is a minefield, and I
certainly do not wish to make a legal pronouncement on the
matter.
My last statement should be taken "morally" not "legally." :)
And neither was the rest of my post in legalese, as I refer to
the "spirit" of the GNU's argument.
Legally, the definition of words is very important, and many a
lawyer can use that to their advantage. Remember the famous,
"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is." :)
-jc
Kris Dockter
> > That's a big misstatement of the GNU project and what it stands for.
> >
> > Sharing implies consent.
> >
> > The spirit of GNU's argument is that software authors should give
> > their software away; such a conscious act would imply consent on
> > the authors' part.
> >
> > As far as we know, the OP did not give consent.
>
> Yes, I fully agree with you here. I wrote this post to encourage Kris
> Dockter to licence his next picture under the GNU/FDL licence.
...to licence (sic) HER next picture....
:-)
Just a note of thanks to everyone that contributed to this discussion,
even those that thought my auctions and descriptions were average to
less than average. :-)
Kris
Mike Mills
says...
> get over it....geeze..
And set the damn clock on your computer.
--
Mike