Photo Theft

[DAA]

I haven't read this thread, so my apologies for redundancy. Registering a copyright theoretically gives you the advantage of statutory damages. That is, you only have to show infringement. The damages are set by statute and do not need to be proven. Without a registered copyright, the burden of proving damages is on you. That is to say, simple infringement does not imply damages - you have to prove damages before attempting to collect them.

As a practical matter, and as one who has had his registered copyrighted material severely infringed, I can say that it doesn't really make much difference. Unless you have deep enough pockets to seriously pursue the offender and the offender has deep enough pockets to make it worth your while, your basically just fawked. I mean, sure, you can get youtube to pull your registered copyrighted material down. But good luck collecting the theoretically automatic statutory damages. And I mean - GOOD LUCK... Have had numerous experiences along these lines, registered copyrights, clear cut infringement, sibling lawyers who handle 8 figure litigations for a living anxious to handle the cases pro bono, and I've never been able to collect a dime.

Sucks. But how it really is...

- DAA

 

[DAA]

P.S...

My take home message... NEVER post ANYTHING, ANYWHERE, that you actually give a crap about. NEVER!

- DAA

 

[ROKTAXI]

P.S...

My take home message... NEVER post ANYTHING, ANYWHERE, that you actually give a crap about. NEVER!

- DAA

I guess if you just have to post a picture you don't want copied, I would say just watermark the hell out of it.... but then what's the use to distort the photo so it loses it's appeal???

 

[Nick]

I guess if you just have to post a picture you don't want copied, I would say just watermark the hell out of it.... but then what's the use to distort the photo so it loses it's appeal???

Agreed. I don't have many (if any) photos that are worth worrying about, but it does make me super sad to see some of the great photogs I know plastering HUGE watermarks all over their stuff. Sometimes it makes it not even worth looking at. I think I'd rather just accept that there will be a certain level of pilfering and enjoy taking photos. Life is short.

 

[gnwatts]

Watermarks suck. They ruin what might be an otherwise beautiful image.
If someone wants a small low-res image they can have it. You can't stop them.

 

[Yvonne]

I had big problems with photo theft on Flickr and as a consequence basically removed all my shots from there.
I rarely post anything nowadays, just a few snap shots on Facebook or a few shots on my website where they are protected.

 

[Nick]

FYI - Flickr has better protections from people stealing photos than any personal website or Facebook. Amongst the best out of all the photo sharing sites online. If you're really concerned about it, you probably just shouldn't post it anywhere online.

And now time for a rant...

I don't really get this mentality of shutting down Flickr accounts and going insane with the watermarks. And I am not attacking anyone in particular by saying this, I know several other people who have done the same thing. It just makes me think, why bother taking photos then? I guess there is intrinsic value to it, but if people lifting a photo is so unthinkable, just don't post it anywhere. I look at it like this...

1. Are you making a bunch of money off your photos? For 99.999999% of people, that answer is no.

2. Are these people that are occasionally spreading photos around illegally making a ton of money off them? Again, 99.99999% of the time, no. I'm sure there are cases where people are legitimately profiting off of others work, but I can't imagine that is often the case.

Yes, it sucks that people grab photos and share them without proper attribution, but in my personal opinion, I'd rather have that happen then feel inhibited to share my work. A tasteful watermark might be a good, small measure to combat that? Now granted, if I was some magnificent photographer, I might feel different, but personally, I just don't think this whole 'lock everything down' mentality is productive to anyone. Enjoy life, take lots of photos, share them with the world because tomorrow we'll all be dead. I've been going through tons of slides from the 50's from my grandparents. They were really into trying to take some cool shots, but what it's really taught me is that after we're all gone, the only photos that will really matter to anyone are the ones of people and history. All these pretty landscapes we get all worked up about are really just for us to enjoy. So enjoy them! </rant>

 

[Howells Outdoors]

Enjoy life, take lots of photos, share them with the world because tomorrow we'll all be dead. ... after we're all gone, the only photos that will really matter to anyone are the ones of people and history. All these pretty landscapes we get all worked up about are really just for us to enjoy. So enjoy them! </rant>

Exactly!

 

[IntrepidXJ]

I make some money off my photos....and I also post them all over the internet with a small watermark in the corner. I'm not too concerned if someone uses them improperly....it's not worth worrying about....I take and share photos because I enjoy doing it!

Though, I guess I would probably be more concerned if selling my photography was my only source of income...

 

[DAA]

I sell a few as well. But, it's not my reason for taking them in the first place. And, the ones I sell, are large canvas prints, the 1024's I post online would make really lousy large prints but if someone really likes them well enough to try and make an 8x10 or whatever, they can knock themselves out I guess.

I've considered putting a small watermark like Randy does, on just my best wildlife photos. But not so much for "protection", rather just so anyone seeing them would know how to contact the photographer (me) if desired.

All in all though, Nick said it very, very well!

- DAA

 

[IntrepidXJ]

A timely blog post this morning:

http://davidduchemin.com/2013/04/let-them-steal/

 

[gnwatts]

I did not even notice you had a water mark Randy, so I take my remark back.
LARGE water marks are not pleasing to the eye, and may detract from the beauty of a well composed image.
Good article too.

 

[pixie1339]

Lots of interesting points in this thread. My photography is for my own enjoyment and to capture my memories. I share photos on Flickr and Facebook because it makes me happy when someone else enjoys my photos, too. While I don't necessarily like the idea of others using my pictures as if they were their own, I'm ultimately not terribly concerned about it, and I don't plan to stop posting because someone could steal my pictures. I know where they came from, and that is enough for me.

 

[Laura]

Great article! I agree with him completely about my own situation, but if I were trying to pay my mortgage off my photos I'd probably have something to say about it. I think the best thing to do is put a small watermark on your photos so you get credit AND people can look you up if they like your stuff. And make sure what you post is really low res so it doesn't make sense to do anything but pass it around on the 'net. Then forget about it unless someone makes big $$ off your photo (see the realities of law in DAA's post!).

Another story-I had a photo copied off Fine Art America and posted on Pinterest, which then got repinned a bunch of times. Someone decided they liked it enough to buy a 24-36 canvas print of it. It probably wouldn't have happened had someone not stolen it off FAA and spread it around-free advertising!

Lots of interesting points and points of view all around.

 

[gnwatts]

Check out Photoshelter (no affiliation etc). I like it a lot, lot's of storage for the money and good security.

 

[Yvonne]

I always wondered why someone stole so many of my pictures, because most of them aren't that great and you can find much better ones online.
I have no problem with it at all if someone asks to use a picture I've taken.
I had a few cases where some of my shots were stolen and posted by someone as their own pictures with my deceased husband in them. At the first moment I did not know what to say. Maybe this is the reason I'm reacting a bit strange about stolen pictures.

So far I just take a few snap shots for myself and only post some of them. I don't know but somehow I do not like to post too many of mine own shots. Instead I enjoy it more looking at someone else's shots

 

[Laura]

I had a few cases where some of my shots were stolen and posted by someone as their own pictures with my deceased husband in them. At the first moment I did not know what to say. Maybe this is the reason I'm reacting a bit strange about stolen pictures.

Seriously??! Anyone who would do that is really screwed up. I would REALLY have a problem if someone did that to me as well. I've been referring to landscape pictures of mine people have posted on their websites and blogs in this thread, but if someone took my personal shots I would feel violated. I don't post (hardly) any shots of myself or my boyfriend* because I like my personal privacy, but now I've got another reason to keep those to myself.

*okay, there is one shot of him swimming nude on my flickr site, but you can't see anything. It was just such a great memory that I had to do it.

 

[Yvonne]

Seriously??! Anyone who would do that is really screwed up. I would REALLY have a problem if someone did that to me as well.

It was just a landscape shot where my husband was in for scale, but it still sucks that someone really did that.
In the "new" version of the shot his head was cut a bit on the edges, but I could still see that it was him and everything.
Anyway, hopefully there are more honest people out there who honor nice and beautiful shots without stealing them.