Photographer stealing - Check for your images!

<p>Just discovered one of my images on her website. Might want to check and make sure your's aren't there:</p>

<p>capturedbygodphotography slash zenfolio dot com (don't want her getting any links!)</p>

<p>Found it on her Facebook page as well</p>

<p>I didn't recognize a shot of yours there Booray but you would know. I assume you've written to protest.<br>

Ironic, ain't it, considering how determined this photographer apparently is not to have HER images stolen....<br>

Will</p>

<p>Yea, I had to laugh when I saw her big watermark on her images. lol<br>

Here's the picture:</p>

<p><img src="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19286423/Engagement%20pictures%20Ybor%20Tampa%2016.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I tried to direct link to the image here but the anti-spam won't let me.</p>

<p>Here's what she wrote back to me:</p>

 

 

<p><em>These pictures are not for sale.. just a few of my favorite. Good work! Let me know if you see any others :)</em><br>

<em></em> <br>

<em></em>SERIOUSLY?!?!</p>

 

<p>Maybe these things just aren't perceived to be anything serious in small town Alabama. </p>

<p>File a DMCA take down notice with Zenfolio. That will get your image removed quickly and a black mark on her account. It doesn't take many of those for companies like zenfolio to terminate an account for breaching their ToS.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Ironic, ain't it, considering how determined this photographer apparently is not to have HER images stolen....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, but it is hypocritical.</p>

<p>Well, it's not there anymore, but many others are. It's the new thinking out there, if it's on the internet it must be free. At least she left your watermark!</p>

<p>I don't know, she doesn't seem to be a typical shooter. Judging from some of her personal bio information she appears to be a bit of a free spirit on her own unique personal quest and rather naive in the ways of commercial art and photography.....doubt there's any real malice in her actions, perhaps we can allow her a little more latitude and consideration</p>

<blockquote>

<p>doubt there's any real malice in her actions, perhaps we can allow her a little more latitude and consideration</p>

</blockquote>

<p>We won't sue her.</p>

<p>David - I would allow her more latitude if she hadn't photoshopped my logo off my image while at the same time putting a full-size watermark on her own images. She knows exactly what those marks are for, otherwise why mark her own images in such a way that no one can do to her what she did to me.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Judging from some of her personal bio information she appears to be a bit of a free spirit on her own unique personal quest and rather naive in the ways of commercial art and photography.....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So you'd give her the benefit of the doubt based on what<em> she said about herself</em>? Booray is exactly right. She STOLE imagery that was the intellectual property of others, and then put her own watermark on them. We already know she <em>intentionally</em> STOLE (with foresight, <em>and</em> tried to cover her tracks (meaning she <em>also</em> recognized her actions as wrong legally and morally)), what makes you think she doesn't LIE also?</p>

<p>To me, the biggest red flag is her constant references to God and Christianity... I find that often thieves and defrauders use Biblical references and high degree of 'implied' faith to constantly distract people who otherwise might scrutinize their actions closer. To me, someone who is constantly relying on distracting tactics such as that <em>always</em> deserve a second or third close look.</p>

<p>I would contact her pastor, priest, minister or other spiritual leader and let them know about her dishonesty. Apparently she doesn't feel 'though shalt not steal' applies to other people's photos. It's pretty easy to spot the images that aren't hers, she has very little grasp of composition or lighting, so anything that is nicely lit and well composed sticks out like a sore thumb.</p>

<p>The really horrible spot colored image of the baby with a pink bow was taken with an 85L?</p>

<p>This person knows exactly what she's doing. And to throw her religion around at the same time is the worst form of arrogance and hypocrisy. </p>

<p>There's a photo under "The Photographer" with a blonde taking a picture with her legs up in the air and her head off a bridge. I've seen that picture somewhere on PNet, but can't remember who took it.<br>

If you want to see all of her work the password to the client folders is the client's last name ;-).</p>

<p>can't get to the link described....</p>

<p>Steve, change the "slash" to "dot" in the original post and you're there. </p>

<p>What might make it more objectionable is the "© Captured By God Photography" on every image. </p>

<p>So, here comes the "dumb" question: What she did was wrong. I'm not defending her. but what separates her actions from anyone seeing a great photo on PNet and hitting the "pinterest" button which puts that photo into someone's Pinterest page? <br>

I would imagine most non-professional photographers are unaware of copywrite laws and assume as long as a photo shows up on the internet, they can pretty much do what they want to do with it, except to perhaps profit from it, including removal of watermarks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>but what separates her actions from anyone seeing a great photo on PNet and hitting the "pinterest" button which puts that photo into someone's Pinterest page?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>She put it in her portfolio, removed the original watermark, and replaced it with her own. She told the world that she authored the work. Need I go on? even the most utterly clueless individual knows that if you cross out or erase the authors name on a book, and replace it with your own, <em>that is the theft of intellectual property</em>, <em><strong>especially</strong></em> if (at the same time) you are <em>soliciting business based on that work</em>...<br>

...then to imply so strongly you are a "christian"... wow.</p>

<p>For the record; She removed my logo but did not put her own on the image. </p>

<p>Oh... I misunderstood, I guess that ain't so bad then, all she did was grab your pic, remove your watermark, and slip it into her portfolio to claim it as her own... I wonder if she sold any prints of it? I guess the Christian thing would be to forgive her for her transgressions and go on. Though I'd still call her pastor if it were my work she'd stolen.</p>

<p>Of course her posting the images begs the question of where she got the images to steal in the first place. Post any image on the web and it can get stolen. The only protection is to watermark any such images across the entire image. If you give a client the images on CD (or I prefer DVD) then you have lost control. And most of the clients of today want the images digitally rather than prints. You can't really stop such clients from posting on social media.</p>

<p>You can pursue finding such images and having the images removed. It takes effort and time. You could sue and get what? It would be difficult to prove monetary damages and do you really want to spend the time required to pursue it legally? If you get a judgement will you ever get paid?</p>

<p>You can contact the hosting service to have the image removed. You can also contact the individual and request the image be removed. Neither of which is guarantee that the image will be removed, or will not appear somewhere else.</p>

<p>You can just let it go. Chalk it up to experience. Quit mud wrestling with a pig because all that happens is you both get dirty but the pig enjoys it.</p>

<p>Something has to be done. But what? To do nothing will just make the problem worse, which it is already becoming. Digital has changed everything. I don't know the answer and cannot advocate what anyone should do as that is their choice. I don't have time, or the resolve, to be crawling the web looking for my images.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>She STOLE imagery that was the intellectual property of others, and then put her own watermark on them. We already know she<em>intentionally</em> STOLE</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not stolen but copied.</p>