Archive for the ‘Copyright’ Category

500px Creates 500px.me – Hosts Photos in China

500px fingerprint logo   Earlier this year I wrote a post outlining why I no longer wanted to participate in the 500px website. As you may have heard, a few days ago another rather large issue with 500px came up regarding its deal with the Chinese Company Visual China Group. Initially I wrote this to be an addition to my 8 reasons post, but I think it merits mention on its own as well as mention on the list.

   Last week many 500px users noticed a site called vcg.me that contained 500px user profiles and photographs. I don’t know how they found this site, but it appeared to quickly mirror new photo uploads, comments and favorites. This caused some confusion and discord in a number of 500px groups (their user forum) and in other posts on the internet and social media. Initially I speculated this was another Chinese site scraping the content of another website, which isn’t that uncommon. I believe this very thing had happened to 500px before, but in this case, it was not a malicious site – it was 500px themselves.

   Back in July of 2015 500px announced they had obtained $13 million in funding from China’s Visual China Group (VCG) in order to fund various ventures including expansion into China. I didn’t think too much about this at the time, China is a huge market and a lot of companies want to explore business there. When the vcg.me site (now rebranded 500px.me) showed up earlier this week it became apparent that there could be some major issues with the move into China. This was to be an entirely new Chinese site written in Chinese and hosted in China. 500px support confirmed with various users frantically asking for an explanation that indeed this was a 500px affiliated website. This was the first the company had indicated that a whole new site would be the platform for a move into China, though nothing official was really released until a few days later when they started damage control. They promised that at some point in the future users would be able to control what images showed up on the Chinese site. Allowing this only after the fact really is too late – the cat is already out of the bag and images have already been transferred to the new Chinese based hosting. As I write this 500px.me has been hidden while it is finished – something I bet 500px wishes it had done from the start.

   All of 500px’s customer communication failures in this matter aside, the main issue for me is the Chinese based hosting. As you might know I pursue copyright infringements of my work. All of the legal and copyright infringement “enforcers” I have dealt with immediately bow out when China is mentioned – there is simply no way to enforce copyright laws in that country (or many others). I have tried on my own with a few infringements that I found particularly frustrating (one of my bear photos used on a trophy hunting guide’s website) and got absolutely nowhere with the web hosts or the companies in question. While I realize that any image I upload anywhere may be used in China and other jurisdictions where I have no legal power, I’d prefer my images do not start on servers in those countries. I don’t know all the implications the 500px.me Chinese based site might have for the intellectual property rights of its users, but I bet there will be some. 500px indicated to me on Twitter that if a Chinese infringement occurs they will “act on your behalf to send takedown notices and infringement notices”. Since this is not possible for my lawyers and companies that handle copyright claims already, I have no idea how 500px can guarantee this. I suspect they won’t be able to do anything more about this than any other company or law firm currently can – so their statement to the contrary likely means nothing at all.

   Another issue that I find unsettling is one of censorship. As I stated, I don’t have much of a problem with 500px pursuing business for its photographers in any country, including China. I had imagined that this would take place on their current site but it has been indicated by many that the main 500px site is banned/blocked in China because it contains a lot of images that the Chinese government doesn’t want their citizens to see (and not just the nudity). Having the files located in China itself allows the government and VCG to censor it so that it can be shown domestically. While this is not new on China’s part, I do find it an unsettling part of this deal.

   I had abandoned 500px in late 2013 due to the reasons I outlined earlier this year, but I had left 5 images behind as a kind of advertisement of sorts. After finding out that this vcg.me/500px.me site was indeed an official 500px entity – I deleted all of these images immediately. Perhaps I was lucky and caught them before they were transferred to Chinese servers, but I have no way of verifying this. As it stands now, 500px has blocked access to vcg.me and 500px.me as they (presumably) continue to develop the sites. Unfortunately this also means people cannot directly see if their content is being transferred there or not. A lot of users seem angry enough about 500px’s handling of this that they are deleting their images and their accounts entirely. I feel that is probably the proper course of action at this point, but I can’t help still feeling disappointment in what 500px has become after their promising beginnings only a few years ago.

Further Reading

 

I’ve Found A Copyright Infringement! Now What?

organic blueberries

Blueberries – apparently infringers love Blueberries

If you’ve been searching for your images on the internet and have found copyright infringements – what do you do next?

   For many photographers finding our photographs on the internet in places we did not intend for them to appear can be frustrating. I have written this post as a follow up to my earlier post “Finding Copyright Infringements on the Web“. My previous post illustrated one method for finding your images in use on the internet, while this post tries to cover some of the options for what you can do next. I of course should point out that I am not a lawyer, but many cases of infringement are below the threshold for when we may get lawyers involved.

   Your first step should be to first verify that this is actually an infringement. If you have never sold an image license, uploaded to any agencies or even told people they can use an image then this probably isn’t a concern. If you have, however, double checking your licenses beforehand can save potential embarrassment later on.

   There really isn’t a “one size fits all” answer for what to do once you have discovered a copyright infringement. What you choose to do is up to you, and people may see some forms of infringement as no big deal, while others will not. Those sharing their images with a Creative Commons license such as “Attribution Non-Commercial” probably will not care if one of their photographs shows up on a non commercial blog. Some photographers who share their “All Rights Reserved” images will not want their images shared without permission or license in any location other than their own sites. What you are able to do also changes depending on the copyright laws in the part of the world where the infringement occurred. So I can’t tell you what you should do specifically, but I’ll outline a few potential responses that may fit your situation.

The Easy Method – Do Nothing

   I bookmark most infringements that I find, but with many I wind up doing nothing about them. Sometimes an infringement is just a personal blog with little following and no advertisements. Perhaps the infringer even gave me image credit (rare). While credit is worth next to nothing really, sometimes it will mean I simply move on rather than take the time to do something about it. Sometimes I will find an infringement that I would normally do something about, but the server is based in a foreign country where copyright laws are nonexistent or not enforced. Usually this means I am out of luck. While this can be frustrating, sometimes I just have to forget about it and move on. This gets easier the more it happens.

The Removal Request

   This is an option I only reserve for completely non commercial infringements. In a perfect world this kind of request would be met with a positive response and honoured. In my experience, however, most friendly requests for image removal are ignored. Very few actually respond by removing the image, or perhaps giving image credit if that was requested. The remainder respond with the sort of vitriol I won’t repeat here – but you can use your imagination. Whatever the form of non compliance, this means I have to write another email to their web host, or issue a DMCA takedown – which takes even more of my time. For this reason, in instances where I am not pursuing payment, I go straight to the DMCA notice – or email the webhost/social media site directly. I would rather communicate with people in a friendly manner, potentially even educating them about image usage… but it just has not been worth it in the majority of times I have tried it.

The Payment Request

   I always request payment from uses of my images that are even vaguely commercial. I sometimes handle this on my own, and sometimes use a company called ImageRights (more on them later). My usual first contact is fairly gentle. I explain that there must have been some sort of mistake as I have no record of a license for the image use. I then outline that they are infringing on my copyright and give them a price for a retroactive license. If paid, this only give them a license up to the current date. If they want to use the image going forward I point out a new license can be negotiated. Some times this “gentle reminder” goes ignored, but often it is successful and most communications I have had with reputable companies have been fairly civil. Those who ignore my initial letter receive a follow up with much sterner (but still professional) language. Often those who ignored the first letter respond to the second.

The Lawyer

   There have been a few cases where I have sought the advice of a lawyer but thus far have not been able to have one return my calls or emails. I suspect that the cases I have brought up have been relatively small, and have been based in Canada (these were Canadian Lawyers). A US based infringement of a photograph that is registered with the US copyright office would likely be met with a much different reception. So while it is necessary to suggest you may seek the counsel of a good IP lawyer – I have not yet discussed these issues with one myself. I suspect that if you reside in the United States this would be much easier.

The DMCA Notice

   The DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998) protects online service providers (website hosts, Social Media companies etc) in the United States from liability for the content their users upload. When a complaint is made under the DMCA the service provider usually disables the content in question quickly so as to not become liable themselves. What this means for us is if your infringed photograph is on a US based webhost then having the material removed can be relatively easy. If you decide to go after most image infringements a lot of the DMCA notices you may issue will be on social media sites. Rather than writing an email and finding an appropriate recipient for it – many of these companies have a form to fill out that is much quicker and easier. I’ve included a few links to notable services below and their DCMA/Copyright Complaint forms.

Pinterest: https://about.pinterest.com/en/copyright
Tumblr: https://www.tumblr.com/dmca
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/help/contact/208282075858952
Twitter: https://support.twitter.com/forms/dmca
Google: http://support.google.com/legal/troubleshooter/1114905?hl=en
WordPress.com: http://automattic.com/dmca-notice/

For most web hosts you can find the DMCA agent (who to contact) on their website, in their terms of service document, and occasionally in their support section. Individual services may also outline the exact language they require in a DMCA notice. While these things are pretty standard, sometimes a web host will require an address and phone number, which is information I tend not to give out unless it is necessary.

The US Copyright website also has a list of DMCA Agents that may come in handy for some web hosts: http://www.copyright.gov/onlinesp/list/a_agents.html.

How do I write a DMCA notice and who do I send it to?

   A DMCA notice requires some specific “legalese” to be valid. The article “Two Easy Steps for Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement” on the NPPA website explains both how to write a DMCA notice and how to determine where to send it. Written by a lawyer too. I did point out before that I’m not a lawyer right?

   While this article outlines a way to find a website’s host via IP I have found the initial method of a simple whois search to be fruitful at least half the time. The nameservers for a website domain name are often something like ns1.websitehostname.com and this makes determining who to contact rather easy in many circumstances.

   Generally speaking most of these notices are acted on within a week. Some may take longer depending on how busy they are but I have also had takedown notices work in the same day I sent the notice. Do be aware that the sort of person that would have given me a nasty email (see “The Removal Request” section above) occasionally responds in the same manner with a DMCA request. At that point, however, you can pretty much ignore them – the image is no longer on their site. In one case this did mean that suddenly a LOT of my images were suddenly on their site. Another email solved that, and their site never resurfaced online again that I have noticed. They were likely asked to find new hosting.

ImageRights

   US based ImageRights is a company that can pursue copyright claims for you in many corners of the world. I initially tested them out with their Basic service to pursue a Canadian infringement of one of my photographs in a visitors guide. The publishers had asked me to use the photograph, and when I mentioned the image was not free (and quoted my price) they did not return further emails. Later the next year I accidentally happened upon the same photograph used in their guide. This was the first infringement I had found that really got my blood pumping – so I tried out ImageRights for the first time. They successfully recovered a settlement worth many times what the image license would have been. Pleased with that result, I signed up for a Pro account for a year. It is early yet, but I am happy with their progress on subsequent infringements so far. Maybe I’ll write a review of my experience with them after a year of data.

Final Thoughts

   Ultimately this can be a full time job depending on how many images you are finding without licensing or permission. Often just looking through your images with a reverse image search can take a lot of time. This is why I occasionally do nothing – it often isn’t worth hassling personal bloggers or non commercial users. Even writing a DMCA notice for them can take time, and you may not want to spend that time in every circumstance. I do think it is important to take copyright issues with your work seriously, however. If you do not look into these issues at all – you may find an infringement that does get you angry eventually. At that point you may find that your image has been all over the internet for several years, and having all those images removed that late in the game can be difficult or even impossible. I stay on top of this so none of my images get away from me in that manner, though a few still have.

Good luck! If you have any questions or comments feel free to leave me a comment below.

Finding Copyright Infringements on the Web

Already found an infringement? You may be more interested in the follow up to this post:

I’ve Found A Copyright Infringement – Now What?

   If you share your photography on the internet it is very likely that people are using them elsewhere on the web without your permission. No amount of transparent overlay images, right click disabling, watermarking, or other measures are going to stop this. Copyright infringements may be in the form of anything from use on personal blogs to commercial uses by large companies. Some may give you image credit, but most of the time I haven’t found this to be the case. Others may even take the credit for your image themselves! So how do you find these infringements on the web?

How do you actually find your images being used without permission?

   Search engines such as Google, Bing and Yandex have reverse image search capabilities you can use to find your photographs. Other companies such as Tineye have built their business around reverse image search. For most of these services you can drag and drop an image from your computer to be searched, or copy and paste a URL instead. I find this to be a tedious method when I have many many photos to search for. Luckily there is an easier way through using browser extensions.

   Personally I use an extension for the Firefox browser called “Who Stole My Pictures?” that allows me to search for infringements on all 3 services (Google, Tineye, Bing and Yandex) with just one right click. The search results open into new separate tabs. You can also download extensions that just use one of these sites for your reverse image search. Similar extensions exist for Google Chrome and likely other browsers as well. With most of my searches Google Images is the service that seems to find the most results. As I am searching for these images to pursue copyright infringement claims I will usually use all 3 services. The extra time involved continually clicking results tabs with no results is easily paid for in the 1/50 times when Tineye or Yandex will yield a result other than my own websites. Frequently these are results that Google did not find.

August 2015 Edit: I have done a lot of reverse searches since I wrote this post back in early 2014. Since then, I do not think I have found a match on Tineye or Yandex that wasn’t on my own site or social media accounts. I know Tineye is still often recommended as the reverse search engine to use, but more and more I ignore it (and Yandex) now. Bing has started their own reverse image search service, but it mostly seems interesting in terms of finding infringements on Pinterest at this point. This is relatively new, however, so perhaps it will show improvement with time. So while I still use the “Who Stole My Pictures?” extension to search for infringements on Google, Bing, Yandex and Tineye concurrently on occasion, I generally now use Google alone for infringement searches.

   The screen capture below shows my Firefox extension in action – performing a reverse image search on one of my blog photographs. Note that this search is on one of my 500 pixel wide thumbnails. Sometimes searches on thumbnails and full size images (on my blog full size is 900 pixels wide) yield different results. It can be worth it with “popular” images to do a search on both your thumbnails and full size images.

screenshot of right click menu for infringement reverse image search

When using a reverse image search plugin, you can right click to search for infringements of your images with multiple services at once.

What if I can’t right click on my images?

   For some of you the majority of your images may be on a site such as 500px, Flickr, Smugmug or Photoshelter that do not allow you to right click. While many of my infringed photographs come from my blog, the bulk of my image library is on Photoshelter. For those images I simply batch upload downsized copies to my own website in a hidden folder. I then load each photo and do the right click from there. When I am finished I empty the folder. For those of you without a website – there are fewer options. You can right click on G+ and images on Facebook if you have your images there. I tried this with both Dropbox and Google Drive and was unable to right click on those photos, though competing services may differ in that regard.

The search results

   Below are the search results for the reverse image search depicted in the first screen capture above. There were no results for Tineye or Yandex, so I closed those tabs and looked at the Google Images results. As this was a fairly recent blog post, I am not surprised to find only my blog in the results. Normally for each image I search I have a few results on Google – either from my blog or my Photoshelter image library. Sometimes my own posts on social media (mostly Google+) will show up here as well.

screenshot of right click menu for finding infringements via reverse image search

Reverse image search results from Google Images.

   Regardless of the reverse search engine used, I scan the results for sites that are not my own, or are posts that I did not make. One area to point out in the Google results above is the area titled “Visually similar images”. Most of the time if the image I am searching shows up here, it is on one of my websites or social media profiles. However, I do think it is important that you hover over a photo in this area to verify its location. I have caught more than one infringement in the visually similar images area that did not show up in the main search results. In the case of the search above – the visually similar image was from my blog post.

   The above methods may not be the only way to accomplish this kind of searching, but in the many methods I have tried it is currently the fastest and easiest. If you have a way that works better for you I would love to hear it!

I have found an infringement! Now what?

   I have written a follow up post outlining some of the options available if you have found an infringement: I’ve Found A Copyright Infringement – Now What? I hope that it will help point you in the direction to go next!

Photographic Thievery

flickrlogo

I ran across a link to this article in an online photography forum. The article itself is pretty misinformed, basically advocating that people steal images from flickr users for their own interior decorating needs with little or no regard for the copyright already held on those images. What I do like about this is that the authors ignorance on the matter was quickly pointed out by quite a number of irate photographers (read the comments – really the best part). What followed was a number of follow-ups and clarifications about what the article really meant. Whoops!