how big a problem is people getting their work stolen on the internet?

[marc_felber1]

<p>I am wondering how big a problem is people getting their work stolen on sharing sites such as photo.net, pbase, and even art morris by someone. Then they turn around and republish the image in a book or worse yet sell the image to a stock agency. This is way I am afraid to even share my prized images of my wildlife shots. I don't want anyone running off and stealing my work and making a profit of something that does not belong to them. Sharing it and sending it to friends is one thing, but publishing and selling the work is something else. </p>

[thomas_wortman]

<p>Marc, posting your photos on the internet for view of someone stealing them and making a profit of your images is a big deal. on my website i in bed a watermark right in the center of the image to stop that. but i read a article a few months ago about watermarks and how easy it is to remove in photoshop so that is not the most secure way to protect your work. another pointer they pointed out was to keep all your original files. there is a company i dont know the name but you can in bed a copyright number in your photos its not visable to the human eye but they say that is a good option. ive never tried it on my photos and have not looked in to it real deep so i cant say if that is the best option.</p>

<p>Thomas</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Marc: register your work with the copyright office so that you can go after infringers with the Big Federal Hammer. Secondly: just don't post them online at a high enough resolution to be of any commercial use. <br /><br />As for whether or not a visible watermark across the image is better or worse for your audience and reputation and publicity than having someone put a copy of it up on their facebook page without crediting you? Only you know the value you put on having your images displayed in places like this.<br /><br />Mostly, though: keep the resolution low, and the problem pretty well takes care of itself.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Even if you put a watermark on an image what is stopping someone from stealing the idea behind the image.</p>

[franklin_polk]

<p>@Marc: I'd agree with the previous posters, put a watermark and keep the images low resolution.<br>

@Harry: Well, one could argue that ultimately, all photographs taken after a certain point are just copies of ideas of other artists. It is hard to copyright a vague idea. What about things like scenic points? I have a few photos from some of my travels that look identical to published ones, because there is a vantage point that most people go to. I didn't copy anyone, but someone could claim that I did.</p>

[ben_goren]

<p>Marc,</p>

 

<p>The simple solution is to only post low-resolution images on the ’Net, and be happy for

people to use said low-resolution images however they see fit — consider it free publicity,

even if it’s not necessarily very effective publicity.</p>

 

<p>There’s no way you’ll get anything worth putting in a book from a 700-pixel-wide

image, and a stock agency representative would die from hysterical laughter at the mere thought of

purchasing anything like that.</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>First of all, web images won't work in a print publication unless you post full resolution.</p>

<p>Second, if your images have that much value, why aren't you publishing them?</p>

<p>Third, stock agencies are generally looking for more resolution than a typical web image put up for viewing.<br>

<br /> Fourth, lots of successful commercial photographers put their photos on the web. If they aren't worried about this, why should you be? </p>

<p>I think people worry too much about things that aren't going to happen.</p>

[peter_weimann1]

<p>Photo.net is a big source for thieves. I found a lot of my own and fellow photo.net photograpers on turkish and chinese blogs. Some blogs used up to 34 of my pics. That was the reason for me to withdraw all of my photos from photo.net. Here you can find a collection of links to sites that have stolen my pics:<br>

http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/account/myprofile/464704<br>

The links in the body text lead you to the thieves. I hate those a....es.<br>

Google your name and I am sure you will find similar sites with your pics.<br>

Hope this helps.<br>

Peter</p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>The trick, Peter, is weighing the benefits of the exposure, here on PN, against the revenue that you find you're losing because of the people using the low-res copies on a Turkish blog.</p>

[rob valine]

<p>The problem is as big as the Internet. People have no idea how much stuff is stolen without their knowing it. I once posted some fishing pictures on a nature site that could track downloads. They weren't even very good shots. The downloads were in the hundreds. You simply can't control what people do on the Internet. It's impossible. My advice is this, post your images at 72 DPI and at sizes of 750 x 500 or smaller. Images of that size cannot be used in print or sold in any way. They can only be used on the Internet or in emails. Another thing you can do is put text across the images in photoshop like I did here<br>

<a href="

That way when a blogger steals your image and posts it somewhere, he's giving you free advertising and free exposure. Make the thieves work for you. Turn it into something positive. You might even want to consider encouraging them to use your images that have your web address on them. Watermarks aren't even a speed bump to experienced thieves. I have the right click button disabled on my web site and friends have figured out how to steal the images. They haven't figured out how to remove the text across the images.<br>

Here's one just for the thieves<br>

<a href="

Rob Valine<br>

[mike dixon]

<p><em>I once posted some fishing pictures on a nature site that could track downloads. They weren't even very good shots. The downloads were in the hundreds.</em></p>

<p>You do realize that, in order for someone to see the picture on their screen, the image has to be downloaded to their computer? A "download" doesn't indicate that your photo has been stolen; it simply indicates someone has looked at it.</p>

[john_macpherson]

<p>What Jeff said.</p>

<p>I've actually gained work from people who saw my images on the web that had been stolen. (Because the thief had credited me!) Works both ways.</p>

[alec_myers]

<p>Jeff's right.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Sharing it and sending it to friends is one thing, but publishing and selling the work is something else.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's monstrously difficult to publish and sell your own work, even if it's Ansel Adams standard, and you have the original 8x10 plates or 22Mpixel raw files. As for selling something you downloaded for free? I've heard of it just once, and the case made international news headlines. </p>

[eric merrill]

<p>Marc:</p>

<p>It's not that big of a problem. </p>

<p>I can't imagine a stock agency accepting a web resolution picture. They want high resolution files. </p>

<p>Is it possible that somebody will use your picture and not pay you if you post it online? Yes. Is that wrong? Yes. If they didn't steal your picture, would they pay you for it? Most likely not. Most likely, they'd steal something else.</p>

<p>If you want to share your work online, you take the risk of somebody using a low resolution copy. You could plaster copyright information on top, but that conflicts with the reason for putting it online...sharing it for other people's enjoyment.</p>

<p>Generally speaking, I've found an inverse correlation between logos plastered on the image and quality of work. That is, the pictures with the most invasive copyright notices aren't worth stealing, anyway.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[pete_harlan1]

<blockquote>

<p>Mostly, though: keep the resolution low, and the problem pretty well takes care of itself.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Matt as well as others provide the best short term answer at this time. Low res.</p>

<p>Stock agencies are not interested as already mentioned in web images; they also are wary of anything w/o the proper releases. Further insulation is provided by the people who buy the and publish the images.</p>

<p>If you seek something to concern yourself with, have a look at <em>"Creative Commons"</em> licensing. Yikes!<br>

Now that's scarey! Ooops; did I open a can of worms? ;)</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>I have yet to see one single documented case where a professional publisher have stolen an image and used it without permission from the copyright owner. Every now and then someone states that "this and this publisher used my photo without permission" and almost invariably what happened is that the author of a book got the photo from the photographer and "forgot" to tell the publisher where the photo came from. I work closely with Rohn Engh and PhotoSource International and the question for a documented case is always asked from all the editorial stock photographers we work with and so far for the 10 years I've worked with PSI there hasn't been a single one.<br /><br />Sure, "ordinary" people will lift your web images and print them and e-mail them to friends and family but does that in any way hurt me or my image sales? Nope, not even the slightest. I even have a postcard feature on my website to make it easy for people to send images to each other. Photo researchers love this feature since they can easily send images to authors and editors.<br /><br />As others have already said, keep the files small and resolution low. I don't do big watermarks all over my images because I believe it adds more problems than benefits. For my images they are often used because of detailed, specific content and it's important for researchers, authors and editors to be able to see that detailed content quickly and clearly. YMMW though.</p>

[alec_myers]

<blockquote>

<p>I have yet to see one single documented case where a professional publisher have stolen an image and used it without permission from the copyright owner.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Mikael - not sure it quite counts a having an image stolen by another photographer per se, but there is this case:<br /> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebekka_Gu%C3%B0leifsd%C3%B3ttir">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebekka_Guðleifsdóttir</a></p>

<p>Oh, and other stuff here: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/technology/01link.html?_r=1">http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/technology/01link.html?_r=1</a></p>

<p>I know these have been discussed to death on photo.net before, but they're somewhat relevant.</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Thanks Alec, I sure hadn't heard about the Oz billboard before. I learn something new every day.</p>

[tomwatt]

<p>For a while I was putting the big watermark thing on images, then finally decided it wasn't worth it, and just downsized, lo-rezzed my images, plus a nice dose of the sharpening hammer to make certain that someone wouldn't get much if they tried to steal them. I figure maybe someone will track me down and want a real image someday, but I'm not holding my breath.<br>

And for informational sake, ideas are not copyrightable. Ideas can be patented, but that's a different process. Only the actual execution/final image is copyrighted. The idea behind it, like shooting Niagra Falls from underneath the falls, cannot be copyrighted. Any idiot that wants to can go stand under the falls and shoot looking up.</p><div></div>

[sobeystudio]

<p>Tom-<br>

There's a whale in there? <br>

Marc-<br>

You'll probably make more money from suing the illegal user, than you will selling it. Aside from that- I wouldn't worry about it. Just put lo res images online. Next, are you so sure your work is so good that a thief wants it compared to the abysmal pricing in stock?</p>

[rfader]

<p>As a novice, I've gotta ask...how do you low-rez photos? I use Aperture - would I have to do it on Photoshop?</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>You just use smaller pixel dimension. 800x600 is fairly difficult to print from.</p>

[john_jovic]

<p>It's a huge problem. I keep posting images and no one seems to want to steal anything! ! !</p>

<p>I make joke...</p>

<p>JJ</p>

[robert_sholl]

<p>On my personal flickr account I post full size images but I do a few things:<br>

#1 - they are 80% jpeg. That is as much to speed upload as anything else but if they try to sell the image and get asked for the full original, no dice. <br>

#2 - I put my copyright in the Exif. Wont stop a smart thief but it will stop the stupid ones. Most thieves are stupid and the smart ones are impossible to stop.<br>

#3 I apply a water mark that is a photoshop layer at 1% opacity. Im the only one who knows where it is but if push came to shove, i could prove it was mine. The only way you can see it is at 500% and you have to know what you are looking for.<br>

I have been asked twice if I an image could be used. Both times I granted permission and because both were non-profits, I granted it free, credit only. One of my most popular pictures right now is one I released under Creative Commons that was recognized by a design website as a great CC image. As someone trying to build a reputation, that is good stuff.</p>