Not Again!!!

you'll never know who it was that changed it other than people are following the new version.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

That's pretty crappy!

So the new version links to the old one? I'm confused.

Where does the butterfly one link too?

i had one lady take my work and put her blog notes about her church. i told her she could use it with credit back to me. but i also warned her that other people may not be so kind, and told her that everything on the net is copyrighted and you can't take anything. it wasn't hard to find me either, my name was still on the file.

doing an image search on that image above is almost impossible. it seems to only go to 2 people, but it would take forever to find the actual image. though at least its not animated, some of mine were animated or they stuck disney characters in there.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

You will not want to read this, but I like that butterfly in there. It is a competent digital transformation, even an improvement, ... even if it rips off your original.

Everybody is an editor. Everybody is waiting for source material. In this respect, nothing on the internet is sacred.

I have realized that you simply cannot make the internet something that it is not. It is one big repository, where everything is up for grabs. If a person cannot accept this, then I am afraid that perpetual anxiety will haunt this person.

and wouldn't that be funny if you did copy that one, and the person who took your image, complains that you took his.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

I found one of my photos on Pinterest. It was a black and white, someone had added a tint and given it a pretentious title. I guess they liked it.

I like the butterfly as well but am pissed that they used my flowers, my work to boot! Creative little thieves. Anyone can "improve" someone elses work, but that does not make it acceptable.
@ Edward, I just ran an image search on google and they came up on pinterest both with and without the butterfly. They were not only on pinterest, but all over the place. I am afraid Mike is right on this one, I will never find the original creating scumbag.

Oh Mike, I just wish that they would!

https://plus.google.com/117529522847064151772/posts/exi3YH9jLbh?pid=6068986279811510098&oid=115214164470183533149 might be her.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

yeah it seems like they all go back to her site.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Ouch, that stinks. How do you search what sites an image is on?

you can do a reverse image search with google or tineye, but her thing isn't on tineye. you can get them both as addon


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Be blunt... send her a public message that she has 24 hours to remove your picture or you will notify the site she is on as well as all others she has a stolen your item. I would also report her to Google. Good luck!

and at the very least if it wasn't her, she may be able to direct you to the one that did to it. most of mine are taken from redbubble, then tumblr, someone there uses it or modifies it. i usually try to educate them, all images have a copyright.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Mike, you are a sweetheart! I am pretty sure that was her. I added a warning as a comment under the photo. Could not figure out how to private message her. I did also file a complaint with google. She has a bunch of images there, I wonder who else has their work "modified" by her on there.

probably all of them.

i checked to see if she had a facebook page, but the problem is there is a photographer that has the same name, making it harder.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Good going. Mike is very supportive : )

Amazing how people will post something and have no problem taking all of the credit and high fives from their internet "friends".

on the plus side you know its sellable if they stole it. on the minus, she changed it because she thought she could make it better. its like stealing your car, and they didn't like color so they had it painted... your welcome.



i remember a long time ago, on a critique site i was on, one guy stole pieces of panorama's, that a photographer left up. he would take those, crop them badly, and recolor them - they looked worse than when he started. this was before google images. he would not only take credit, but become upset that we didn't like his editing. someone found out those were stolen and the account was erased. but the gall of getting upset, i guess he is angry because it's the only part he did to it.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

I also looked on pinterest. The original is pinned over and over and over! The first few credit back to my FAA site, then they start just saying pinned by this flower group and that person with no mention of FAA or me. I wrote comments under several of them explaining about how this thing works. I told them to either change it to link back to me or remove it. We will see!

I don't look any more, but I probably should. I'm in denial. Denial is a nice place. I don't want to leave denial.....

I really get angry for the person this happens to. I'm angry for you, Phyllis....

that's the problem with pinterest. they can pin it, and change the link as well. it's not stable like many think it is. and once they change the message, your name is lost. but yeah i do agree it's best not to chase them down. you won't gain anything but heartburn from it. unless they changed it and you have the time. or they took credit for it, ignore it. if its a blog get a link for it.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

That stinks...i would be pissed. I dont like when people think they can take others work & call it theirs. They should get their ass outside & spend hours like us taking photos but curious..I have the FAA watermark on my photos....are those easily steal-able? Should you start using it?

Katie, I used to have watermarks on my work and decided to stop because of all of the negativity that I read in the discussions over the years by others. And as far as them just getting out and taking the photos. I have rose gardens all over my yard. I spend so much time weeding, pruning, fertilizing and so on. Not to mention that my arms and legs get sliced to shreds working in the gardens. There are not many things that I enjoy more than gazing at my rose garden full of large, fragrant, colorful blooms. And to think that someone just can steal what I labored HARD to get just puts me in a tizzie...

Sad to hear about the theft Phyllis. I have the FAA watermarks on my images and I don't think it has made any difference in sales. Even at our shows, people take pictures of our work without asking! I hope you can get the thief identified. I was wary of pinterest when it first appeared. Now we have a many sites like them sharing and resharing many times over and never pay one cent for the pleasure. Wouldn't it be nice if one penny per share was put in our PayPal account? LOL

I think the little thief will be very surprized at the messages I left on her wonderful artwork....Hopefully, all of her fans will see it before she does. Heehee

Way to go Phyllis! Hopefully many others will be influenced after reading the messages.

probably not. many don't read them, if anything they may see phyllis as the hater and boo her. likely that all of those friends have similar things on the web. many take and haven't a clue they can be traced.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Isn't this just great! Found another "modified" version. Anyone out there that can translate this for me?
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/293437731944352211/

Diane, You stole those roses from another artist. Why? You could not do any art for yourself? This is not your work. Try again.

Phyllis,

Right after your link, I left the above.

I believe strongly in the copyright laws. Follow them to the letter.

I suggest a couple of you leave this lassie a note or two. But that is up to you.

Dave

Mike,

Thanks for the heads up about Google Reverse Image search.

This is okay with me. Scroll down a bit.....to my Into the Night....

http://www.veooz.com/photos/iHZ6uBL.html

Thanks David, I appreciate you writing that on her page. Maybe she will think twice about stealing someone else's work again.

there are people out there that believe that if they change your artwork even the tiniest bit that they aren't infringing on copyright. Crazy.

The only people on the planet who are concerned about this are right here in this thread. You have all manufactured a problem for yourselves and are now duly upset.

"there are people out there that believe that if they change your artwork even the tiniest bit that they aren't infringing on copyright. Crazy."

Melissa, it's doubtful they think about copyright at all. It's not an issue. They find a picture, put a poem on it, post it, done. It's low-rez sharing and kudos all around. So they get a nasty message or two from internet haters. It's attention! So who looks crazy in that situation? Not them!

Here's the point: Nearly 100% of the time it's perfectly okay to do exactly as they are doing. They get likes, followers, re-pins and within their worldwide peer group it is exactly how social media is used. If they do it 500 times they might attract two or three haters. So what? Your "problem" is not their problem.

Whatever laws you are trying to enforce are rooted in the last century before the internet was ever imagined or invented. No one is interested in enforcing outdated laws that don't apply to the current situation.

I don't think low-rez, social media image infringement (it's a stretch for me to even call it that) is worth even 10 seconds of concern. Someone likes my picture. They add a poem. Great. They add a butterfly. OK. Thumbs up.


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

no dan its not ok to steal. low rez, high rez, stealing is stealing and any size can be sellable. if they wanted it, or they needed it, they shouldn't be stealing it. no the world isn't going to care. and if someone has a home break in, i won't care unless i'm involved. i don't see why you don't seem to care about other people's copyrights. or seem to think they have no value when the image is smaller.


---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

As usual Dan is spot on.

why is he spot on? so when your stuff is taken for any use, we won't have sympathy.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

I suppose everyone is entitled to their own opinion but in my opinion, stealing is wrong no matter how you change it or "update" it. A thief is a thief no matter if they steal a candy bar or the crown jewels, they are still thieves. My image has been viewed over a thousand times with no sales and I attribute that to pinterest and situations just as this one. Everybody and their mama has this photo on their social media sites, embellished to their liking and there is not much that I can do about it. I think that pinning peoples work is absolutely ridiculous and profits the artist nothing but that is just the way things are. However, when they change it up a little and take credit for such beautiful work, even thanking everyone for the compliments, that is just wrong and where I step in!

I had no idea this was going on, I thought the watermark feature prevented this from happening. How did you do the image search -- I need to check my work. I agree, Integrity First.

Dan,

Respectfully, you are not out thinking us at all.

Your efforts dont work that way in this case.

Dave

I don't really do much with social media, actually almost none - so this may be an obvious question to most, but if I never allowed the Pinterest button to be used here under any of my photos, does that actually prevent anyone from pinning it?

Ive spent many a time filling out DMCAs on the Pinterest website. I hate Pinterest and its users.
As for someone manipulating your image, I would send them an invoice !

With my art, I take famous western cultural icons and make new arrangements and effects. My influences are many, from the Renaissance up through the modern day. In the work, I blend different art styles.



Okay,... that is interesting.


And as usual, Mike S. and I disagree on this: Mike says "stealing is stealing". I say that what we are talking about here is NOT stealing. There IS a difference between low rez, high rez, and hard copies. There is a difference between physical barriers with flesh-and-blood enforcers and cyber barriers with little more than mental wishes. The internet is NOT the physical world in which the copyright law was founded. The internet is one big creative commons, whether we want it to be or not.

You see a tornado approaching your house. Do you take cover, or do you go out onto the lawn to curse the tornado with the intent of deterring it? Some forces of the universe you cannot fight. You have to embrace them. Go zen on them.

I am a graphic designer and yes low rez is low but I will tell you I can defeat a watermark in about 10 minutes and even with low rez images I can make art, should I choose.

all you "I wuz robbed" photogs, are living in a whole 'nother universe. But if you want to chase Big Foot through the woods, fine by me.

Mike when is last time you (or anyone here) has taken a scofflaw to court over an appropriated image?

"no dan its not ok to steal."

Off topic. How do you feel about killing or sex before marriage? What? Those are not the topic either? Neither is stealing.

Copyright infringement is not stealing. Neither is copying. Theft and stealing are NOT synonyms for copying or copyright infringement.

Real theft must be accompanied by the intent to deprive the person with rightful possession of their property or its use.

None of that is happening here. So why are people upset? Seriously. It's not theft, it's not stealing, it isn't depriving anyone of any rights or the use of their property. Control issues? Jealousy? What's really happening?


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

Dan, I did not post this to ruffle feathers or any other reason than I feel as though my work was stolen and to bring it to the attention of fellow artsit here who may also have their work being claimed by this THIEF. And as far as what is really happening, I would ask that of you...Control issues? Perhaps if someone is so persistent in trying to persuade others to feel and not feel certain emotions, I would have to ask if they themselves are dealing with control issues!
Par for the course, I will now close this discussion because it has lost its purpose other than turning into a big ego fest. but not before graciously thanking Mike for his brilliant and helpful guidance.