Looking for design inspiration?   Browse our curated collections!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

S Desiata

8 Years Ago

Petition For Anyone Frustrated With Amazon Enabling Design Theft...

Hi, I hope no one minds my posting this...but if anyone is having issues with finding their designs being sold by fraudulent Amazon shopkeepers, please consider signing this petition on Change.org, started by a fellow frustrated artist. Here is the link to the petition, located on Change.org:

https://www.change.org/p/amazon-com-remove-product-listings-that-sell-stolen-artwork-shut-down-stores-that-violate-the-seller-agreement-with-regard-to-intellectual-property-rights-and-have-a-better-vetting-process-in-place-to-approve-sellers?recruiter=355688736&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink

Thanks, Sue


Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

I'm not a lawyer, but this is how I understand it. There is a reason sites like Amazon and PODs place the onus for copyright verification on the person who offers the product for sale.

Because it's not their fight.

They will never assume responsibility for copyright verification because that would make them liable for breach of contract lawsuits brought by people who have been infringed. There is no upside for them. They'd be trying to institute a requirement they couldn't verify or pursue.

Since Amazon is not the actual copyright holder, they can't prove infringement or file for infringement. That has to be done by the copyright holder. The copyright holder is the only person who can prove infringement and is legally the only person who can file a complaint.

I'm sorry, but that petition is a waste of time. Artists must take responsibility for their own work and recognize that part of selling online may be dealing with infringement. If you see an infringment, report it.

I have done so with infringements to my own work 4 times now and each time Amazon has responded within an hour and removed the offending store within a day. I had to prove I was the copyright holder in order for them to take action. They simply cannot take action, pre-emptive or otherwise, without the initiation of the actual copyright holder.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

Exactly what Cynthia said. Our own Terms of Use place the onus on you, the uploader.

If an artist contacts us with a properly filled DMCA we remove the offending work. There is nothing else to do really.



 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

If there was somewhere to comment on the petition page, I would share this information there. I tried to message the petition starter, but there's no way to do that. The petition is a waste of time. It's based on incorrect information.

all that energy should be used to teach artists how search for unauthorized uses of their work and how to file complaints through the proper channels.

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

Infringement is a cost of doing business on the internet. It sucks I get that. But it is only going to get worse from here. I really do not see anyone stepping forward and becoming the policing agency for this issue anytime soon.

I think you simple have to the best you can to protect yourself, with out damaging your own separability or figure out how to sell you art and stay off the internet.

Like I say, that sucks, it is not right, it is not fair... but life is often that way.

You have to understand, Amazon, FAA, eBay and others are like the owners of a mall.

If you go into your local brick and mortar mall and found some guy selling your images as posters, you would not think of trying to hold the mall owner responsible. At least you would not get fare doing it.

Same thing with selling on the Internet. The individual person is the problem, not the Amazons or the FAA's or the eBays. Then you have the problem of out of the country entities that simple have no copyright laws to enforce.

 

S Desiata

8 Years Ago

Thanks for responding, Cynthia! Yes, I understand it's a long-shot for Amazon to change their system. I too, have filed complaints to Amazon. My designs eventually get removed, but no sooner, I find it being sold on a new fraudulent shop there. As other artists have stated, it's like playing whack-a-mole!

What bothers me, is that once a complaint has been filed with Amazon, and the design has been removed, it seems clear to me that Amazon has acknowledged the fraudulent practices of the particular shopkeeper. With this being a violation of Amazon's own community policy, shouldn't they shut down the shop? Yet they continue to allow these shops to continue operating with one less stolen image. It's just so very frustrating, not to mention time consuming for the artist.

Anyway, if nothing else, the petition allows for artists to vent their common frustrations with Amazon...thanks again for the response Cindy:)

Sue


 

S Desiata

8 Years Ago

Aw thanks everybody for responding - you're all right, and I really appreciate all of your comments! Just helps to vent sometimes.

 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

No no, it's not a long shot, it's NEVER going to happen. It's unsupportable under current copyright laws.

We don't want companies making judgement calls about what is infringement and what is not. That's on us, the artists.

Even if the people at Amazon suspect infringement, they CANNOT verify that or demand the item be removed without written proof of copyright from the actual copyright holder.


The only way is whack a mole, and as artists who sell on the web, it's up to us to decide if it's a fight worth pursuing. No one else can pursue it for us.

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

I agree, if Amazon would have a more extensive seller vetting process to begin with, this would be happening less. However, according to my office's correspondence with Amazon last year, they refuse to do so. Since they won't change their system, I have elected to change where I spend my money. I haven't spent a dime on Amazon since last year and told them I would not -- nor would anyone else in my office -- until they change their system to stop this on the front end. Of course our $10,000-$20,000 we spend on there between us each year is peanuts to Amazon...but if everyone did that, perhaps they might sit up and take notice. I wonder how many artists who consistently find their stolen work on Amazon still spend their money there? I just refuse to give my hard earned money to a company that blatantly allows stolen artwork on their website -- and they DO have the power to stop it, with a stricter vetting system for their sellers. Unfortunately I don't think they will listen unless they see a financial downfall as a result of their actions {or non actions}.

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

Boycotts very rarely if ever effect the decision makers of multi-billion dollar corporations. The people that are effected are the working stiffs that have no say what so even in the decision, that lose their jobs when on the rare occasions the boycott effects the bottom line. Luckily not even that happens very often.

It like the people calling for a boycott on any business that is owned by a trophy hunter. For every one trophy hunter that will actually be effected, on average, there will probably be at least 3 to 10 working class people that no nothing about the trophy hunting issue, that will lose their jobs.

Boycotts even high profile ones, usually do a lot to raise awareness for the organization promoting the boycott, but they most often hurt more innocent people than the number of people they think they really want to hurt.

 

Ricardo Almeida

8 Years Ago

I've seen many people complaining about that.
Amazon makes a lot of money, it should find a way to protect intellectual property. It should get some of that money and hire somebody do to something about it.


 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

Not going to happen and complaining about is not going to make it happen.

Read what Cynthia and Abbie said.

 

Ricardo Almeida

8 Years Ago

They have to follow the law like everybody else.

 

Melissa Bittinger

8 Years Ago

I signed, I don't think it hurts anything and it could help. By that I mean maybe Amazon will step up and find a better filtering system to help prevent so much of this from being such a constant headache and financial ache and time eater!

I don't know why someone can't write some code for a system (may have to be third party) you load your image/s and information into that would monitor sites and/or prevent that image from being uploaded by another party that isn't one of your....vendors/licensing partner or you. Any other business name or entity would be blocked.

Of course, this would only work if sites like FAA, Amazon and the others would advertise that they use 'Image Protection Service Verified'...yes, I made up that name but something like that. Similar to the little security things on sites where you pay with a credit card.

This would require the copyright holder to update information on any images and of course prove or show verifiable copyright ownership in the...let's call it a 'listing'.... but that's bound to be less of a hassle than chasing your art all over the place?


edit to add: Sean...if you end up writing code and starting a business for this, I want free service for life for giving you the idea. ;o)

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

They are as far as they are concerned. Get yourself a lawyer and challenge them. Short of that you are wasting your time.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.


 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

You guys are missing the point. The think they are doing all that is requited of them.

Like I said, if you shop in a mall and one of the tenants screws you in some transaction, you are not going to sue the mall owner and get anywhere. Pretty simple stuff. That is the position they are in, as far as they are concerned. And that seems to be one the courts have backed, or no one has challenged them in court. So that is pretty much the options.

Short of convincing the world that Bezos was part of killing Cecil, you are not going to sway public opinion enough to make a difference, imho.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

Leave all mention of Cecil for his thread please

 

S Desiata

8 Years Ago

Hi again, all!

Cynthia: For many artists who are passionate about what they do, I think it most definitely is a fight worth pursuing. You mention having gone through the infringement process 4 times yourself. I think it’s the artists (myself included) who find themselves having successfully utilized the proper channels to have their work removed - literally dozens upon dozens of times - that reach a boiling point to express the need for change. I give the person who started this petition much credit for going a step beyond simply accepting the vetting and removal process as the only means to protect her work. I really do appreciate your responses and opinion; but I also can’t ignore many instances where the general consensus has been “it will never happen,” which, with enough supporters, have ultimately prevailed. I also believe that the few minutes it took me to read and sign that petition, were much better spent as opposed to filling out yet another Amazon form, and emailing thieves.

Abbie: Thanks for your response! I agree that the responsibility is on us, the artists, to take action against others profiting off of our hard work. To me, the more action we take, the stronger our position becomes. This is the intention of this petition.

Floyd: I hate the mall. And along with the vendor responsible for selling my work there, I would certainly bring it to their attention. I’m very protective of my skully buggers! They are fun, and they have coffee with me in the morning. (Kidding) But here’s the thing-

1. I find my work being sold by a fraudulent Amazon shopkeeper.
2. I go through the proper form-filling channels through Amazon.
3. In addition, I contact the individual fraudulent shopkeeper via email, (per Amazons request) to have the product removed.
4. The thief responds to my email with an “ok,” and removes the product.
5. Amazon responds to my claim, acknowledging the illegal practice of the shopkeeper.
6. The original thief continues on with his fraudulent business, carrying one less product (mine).
7. Within HOURS, my product is back in yet another fraudulent shop going by a different fake identity.
8. (Return to number 1)

My point is this: It is a relentless ongoing cycle. Amazons vetting process is for the birds. If nothing is done, of course, nothing will change. Simple as that. However, I believe that if enough people get up and face a big bully (having the courage to change the things we can), bad press is likely to creep in. And nobody likes bad press. Not even Amazon. I never said anything about boycotts, silly, I was making people aware of an existing petition for anyone interested in adding a simple signature. No harm, no foul.

Jai: Hi Jai, good for you, that’s what I’m talking about – I’m sorry to hear the results of your correspondence to Amazon were not in your favor. But hey, we can’t let unsuccessful attempts diminish our efforts. If the Philadelphia Eagles can keep trying, so can we.

Ricardo: Totally agree! I can only believe they allow the practice to continue because they profit from it as well, which makes them no better than the thieves. Thanks for your response!

Melissa: THANK YOU for signing – of course it didn’t hurt. Like any other voting outlet, the odds may not be in our favor, but I’m always proud to associate my name with a good cause in which I believe. I like your way of thinking!

Well, I'm sorry if I was too long-winded, I like to respond to all of you who respectfully added their voice and opinion to my initial post. But a SINCERE thank you to all who responded, I wish you ALL happy days, and many sales!

Sue

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

My personally opinion is you will make more money in the long run then taking on an unwinnable battle just for the principal. As my grand daddy use to say, having principals and being willing to fight for them is admirable. But it will not pay the bills.

Best of luck with that.

 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

This is not the storefront's (Amazon's) burden. They cannot do anything legally. And honestly, you don't want to give them that power.

If you want to spend time and energy arguing for something that simply won't happen under current copyright protection laws, if you actually want to give the power to decide what is copyright infringment and what is not to big companies like Amazon, effectively giving away your claim to your own work, then I think you are doing artists a big disservice. I don't want some random person at Amazon or some coded script deciding that one of my images is too similar to someone else's and then telling me I have to remove my own work. We can't let this be up to them, we have to do this work ourselves and protect our own work.

I get that it's a cycle. And you're only looking on Amazon. Have you done a reverse image search on Google for your images elsewhere? How about Amazon UK? Amazon Canada? Etsy? How about all the billions of random blogs and pages and stores from everywhere else in the world? It's not bleak or defeatist of me to say this. The US is not the only country on the internet, and outside our borders you cannot enforce our copyright law.

Infringers are not buyers, and shady third party sellers of sub-par products on Amazon made with scraped low res images are not going to make millions off your work. You can either spend all your time chasing down infringements that will probably NEVER result in a sale, or you can focus on creating, legitimate marketing and selling your work, and send out DMCA letters and report infringement when it presents a reasonable threat to your business. (which will be rarely)

Artists must always control every facet of their own work. We have to accept responsibility for the nature of the internet in terms of what we are selling here, and we have to be willing to do what's required to both promote it and protect it ourselves. We don't want to hand this control to others.

The only way to ever stop online infringement of your work online is to never upload your work online. That's the truth of it.




 

S Desiata

8 Years Ago

Floyd: Aw! Your post made me smile! Those are truly words of wisdom from your grand daddy, one fine man, for sure. I certainly am not one to devote more time than I have to a cause - I've done what intended to do, by simply signing my name to a petition, and forwarding a link to anyone who would like to do the same. Took no more time than a cigarette break, (and it was much more satisfying:)

Best of luck to you as well!

Cynthia: Holy smokes - As I said to Floyd, I've really accomplished all I set out to accomplish, by simply reading a petition and signing it, because I agree with it's message. I forwarded the link for anyone who would like to do the same. No harm, no foul, no sleepless nights. I guess if I were you, I wouldn't sign that petition. It's okay to let it go...

 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

Well, let's say it's my mission to educate my fellow artists. Or at least to try to.

I wasn't really talking to you specifically—more to anyone who reads this and misunderstands this situation. Consider it a Public Service Announcement.

:)

 

Colin Utz

8 Years Ago

"And honestly, you don't want to give them that power."

I totally agree with that!

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

There are several problems with the petition, chief among them is the liberal and incorrect use of the word "stolen" instead of the correct word "infringement." That will pretty much kill any chance of anyone at Amazon taking it seriously. The most the petitioner can hope for is a politically correct canned response, along the lines of "Thank you for your interest in Amazon, we take IP seriously, we'll look into it, blah blah blah, here's a coupon for you..."


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

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Valient effort S Desiata! I get what you are trying to say, and I signed, can't hurt. That is, after all, artists trying to take control of their own art. Hundreds of artists, have all been going through the procedure of reporting the infringers, and filling out all the correct information. It keeps coming back, sometimes in the same day.

I see infringement as reproducing art without the artists permission. The term stolen, is often used here, because all these people are doing is going into our galleries/stores, right clicking on an item, such as a pillow, copying the text, and posting it for sale on Amazon, and yes, possible other places. Many of them do not even have the item, they just take the money, close up when caught, and start anew.

Now.........that may not bother some of you, and that is your right. But, I have my name on my text, which has taken me over 20 years to build. You really think that doesn't affect us? Think again!

Also, most of these have been found by doing reverse image searches. I see a lot of these stores selling pillows that are right click images straight off of FAA, and other POD's and being sold and (supposedly) shipped from China. So this could well be affecting many of you, better go do some reverse image searching.

And fortunately, I haven't been hit as hard as most, because I use, and love, watermarks, and sign all of my work. I love having the freedom of making my own choices and business decisions! I'll stand with my fellow artist on this one.

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"That is, after all, artists trying to take control of their own art."

No, it is artists attempting to foist their responsibilities onto someone else. Far too many uneducated artists are naively demanding that the internet work the way they want, rather than taking advantage of the way it already works.


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

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

That is not at all how I see it Dan. I sure don't foist my responsibilities onto someone else, never have, nor make demands. This is more like asking for help, after we have all been battling on our own for a long time. So I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. If you don't care, that is your right, but please do not put down those that do. And please do not assume that because we do speak up, that we are either naive or uneducated, that is rather insulting, and condescending.

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Here is a quote, with permission, from Cindy, the gal that started this petition........... she does not have an account over here, but her words sum it up beautifully, what this attempt is all about. Thank you Cindy!

"I don't know that I'll have time to respond today but wanted to say a few things. I don't believe Amazon should assume responsibility for copyright verification. And yes its up to us artists to take responsibility for our work and accept that infringements are part of the whole deal. BUT, Amazon shouldn't make their infringement reporting system a PITA and difficult to work with. They shouldn't be sending us round and round in circles.

If you visit the Amazon seller forum you'll see people complaining about how easy it is to get their stores shut down. A few customer complaints and their accounts are suspended. Dozens of us complain about a store and I can see they're still up. There's a disconnect here, something is broken. They shouldn't make it easy for thieves to play whack-a-mole with us. It's not only bad for us but bad for the customer. Take the Square Pillow store for instance. If I remember correctly they have 273 reviews. I am going to assume a small percentage of customers will actually leave a review. Let's say it's 25%. That tells me they've had over a thousand sales. That's money that goes into their pockets, not mine. Money made off of my work. And Amazon is making it hard for me to go after them.

I can go on and on. And usually I don't, I'm a fairly quiet person. You will not see me chime in much in these forums. But the advocate in me has kicked in and I have to say something. Even if I know it's a long shot. I think Amazon is a great website and I love shopping there. And I want to help their website become even more stellar. I want people to shop there and not receive knock-off inferior products. I want people to buy our designs and love our work because it was produced in a high quality manner. And when they do buy our work, I want to be paid for it. Not some internet pirate."

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"And please do not assume that because we do speak up, that we are either naive or uneducated, that is rather insulting, and condescending."

Where are the intelligent arguments? These rants are all the same: Stolen. Theft. Where are the intelligent solutions? You have none. "Do Something" isn't an intelligent proposal. "I have an autistic child" isn't a strong enough argument for changing the internet to fit your individual situations.

Uneducated? Naive? YES. Convince me otherwise.


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

 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago


I found the infringement complaint process to be very simple, both on Amazon US and Amazon UK. It was an online form that I filled out with a link to the offending item and I attached a file of my image. I was done in minutes.

I don't think I got a different process than everyone else. It may be that my result was better, I understand that.


I also get that it's frustrating. I know there are tons of infringers out there. I have been a victim myself. I just think the solution lies more with the artist than with the storefront, because there's no reliable way for the storefront to take action.

Watermark your images. Don't upload images larger than 1000pixels anywhere they will be displayed at that size. Have a DMCA letter template ready to send, and send them when you find infringements. It's never going to disappear, but you can take action on your own behalf.

 

David Gordon

8 Years Ago

If anyone has taken my artwork and put it up on Amazon, I hope they have better luck selling it than I am lately.

But seriously, how does one find the time to search Amazon for their artwork? I started searching once and gave up. Too much stuff on there methinks. Its likely a low percentage of people that just open new accounts when they get caught. Too bad there wasn't some way that Amazon and other online places could ban them permanently once they've been caught.

Dave Gordon
http://dgportfolio.net

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Cynthia, it doesn't seem that you are reading what all we are saying. We ARE the copyright holders and we HAVE been filling out the DMCA letters, etc. These outfits we are "ranting", lol, about, just go in and right click on a pillow, an apron, anything, then post that image, and content, on Amazon, and sometimes other places. I've explained all of this before. We are NOT asking Amazon to do all the work, not by a long shot. But this just keeps going round, and round, and round, and round. These are also low resolution images they are using, straight of of Zazzle, or FAA, or Society6, or CP, or wherever they can grab them. But they don't really actually have an item to sell, they are just using us to take the consumers money. Sorry, but I am just not okay with that. Not for us, and not for the consumer.

We are NOT however, saying that this is the practise of ALL Amazon sellers, because it is not. And we are not trying to shut down Amazon, or anyone else.

Dan, sorry, but I don't feel I need to convince you of anything, anymore then you need to convince me of anything. You know what those opinions are like, lol.

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

David, that is what we are after. Trying to ban these people once they have been caught. I have found most of mine on there, just by typing in my name. And honestly, I don't usually give it much time each week. But when I find it, yep, I fight it! And I sell pretty good, so yes, it hurts. Because if someone searches for your work by your name, goes into Amazon and finds it, cheaper, buys it, and either never gets it or it looks like absolute crap, they may never want to buy your work again. Not to mention, an "infringer" got the profits.

Amazon closes these stores when they get complaints, only to have them come back and open a new one right away under a different seller name. That cannot be good, for anyone! Not even any of you.

 

David Gordon

8 Years Ago

I just checked Amazon by searching my name and found nothing. Maybe they didn't like the FAA watermark on my images. After all, they say its harder to sell with a watermark.

Although not a foolproof solution, maybe they could ban their IP address, email, etc. Or maybe have more stringent requirements to certify sellers from certain places like Russia, Ukraine, China, etc. Or maybe not. I get lots of spambots and hackers on my personal site from those places and its hard to keep them out.

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

I watermark all of mine too David, along with signature and copyright symbol, and as I said before, I have had less problem then many others. I found my newest art, on an apron that a seller from China, right clicked on the image from my Z store, and copied my title word for word. It was even watermarked too, but was lost in the detail. I emailed the seller, and they removed it right away, to which I was grateful.

The positive thing about the FAA watermark, it leads the honest people who like our work, back to here. And hopefully deters the dishonest people. Now, I sure hope that doesn't start the old watermark debate. Anyway, I need to get back to work, so time for me to climb off this merry go round. Good luck people! Oh, and David, banning their IP address, email, etc., is a very good idea. You seem to get what we are after, thank you for that!

 

Carol Cavalaris

8 Years Ago

I understand the petition may not work, however I signed it anyway. Mostly out of sheer frustration. A huge amount of my art is currently being used on various products sold by vendors on Amazon who do not have my permission to use. So many on phone cases I lost count. And I noticed that once a vendor takes it, then it also gets sold by several other vendors.

I just sent one vendor a message and the products were removed, however it is going to take me a massive amount of time to file all the DMCA's. I actually left several comments on the product pages, saying I was the creator of the art, advising they were using without my permission, and requesting they remove the product/s. Amazon sent me back a message that they would not post my comment because it violated their terms of use. However one of my comments got through by mistake, so that felt good.

I also discovered hundreds of my images being used by Aliexpress, and other companies in China, selling my art without my permission on the internet. They didn't even bother to remove my name from the images. Very frustrating. Very uphill, and if I spent my time chasing infringers, that's all I'd be doing. I'm sure many artists feel the same, and It's just so hard to ignore the abuse when we spend so much time creating each work, and someone just takes it for their own gain. I realize it's part of doing business on the net, and I accept that, however if enough people make noise, file DMCA's, sign petitions, fight back, perhaps Amazon will make it easier for those who have legitimate infringement claims to get some satisfaction.

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

Cathy, you are taking this personally. It is not personal. There is a large contingent of uneducated artists who don't understand the mechanics of online retailers or the internet. In other words, they don't know what they don't know.

So when they start this all-to-familiar righteous indignation dance -- which inevitably ends with them feeling persecuted and frustrated -- some of us try to tell them they are (essentially) spitting into the wind.

Cynthia has taken the time to explain very patiently, very explicitly what you face and why you won't get anywhere. In the past I have also written some less biting infringement posts. Some listen, adjust and prosper (I am here for them). Some give up. Others feel better ranting. Beyond the occasional interesting thread, ranting produces no results.


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

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

I don't see Amazon declaring war on ANY of their sellers. That would open enough a whole new can of worms for them. This is what I mean that you have to come to grips with the reality of the situation.

Amazon does not see it they way many of you do. If this was a big legal of money thing for them, then you can bet they would be right on top of it. I am willing to bet that it is quite the opposite. I think their leagal counsel is telling them to stay the course, because when you start doing anything else, you may very well end up with a significantly larger problem.

From some artist point of view this issue is of monumental importance. But the fact is to Amazon it is not. Not in the same perspective that the artist are coming form. But to start doing what the artists want them to do could make it a much more serious problem for them. Why would they want to buy into that?

The bottom line here, there is no real monetary damage that you as artist can quantify. If you could you would have a much better chance of getting attention to your cause. And that is what it is from other people's perspective. Like it or not there is "so what" attitude out there.

You can not prove that you have lost x amount of money. You can only assume you have lost money but in reality there is no hard money loss. The hard money loss is to the person that buys the product and does not get delivery. Even then it is not big money on an individual case by case bases.

If all of sudden you have huge numbers of artist yelling and screaming loud enough and demanding things and maybe even suing, the simple solution for a lot of places that are selling a lot of art, but not as a major source to overall gross revenues, would be to stop selling art.

This may very well fall under the category of be careful what you wish for.



 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"would be to stop selling art."

That is the FIRST viable solution presented here. However, in order for it to work, it would need to be implemented by ALL online retailers. Petitioners, does that work for you?


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

 

David Gordon

8 Years Ago

I have signed the petition perhaps more as a symbolic gesture than an expectation that anything will change - but you never know. It only took a few seconds to sign it. I'm also an Amazon customer and wouldn't want to buy anything that was made from stolen aka "infringed" artwork.

Dave Gordon
http://dgportfolio.net

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

"Petitioners, does that work for you? '

The truth is, there is nothing out there that is even remotely close to anything that is ever going to become reality, that works for the majority of the petitioners.

You are tilting at windmills thinking there is or ever will be. imho.

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Thank you to those that signed, and understand what some of us are attempting. I don't see any of us as ranting, but rather as talking, expressing, and trying to raise awareness. No, honestly, I have no expectations that anything will come of this, but at least I am trying, along with others. That's what some of you told us we should be doing, right? Well, we are! Maybe not in the way you might, but hey, to each his own. Different strokes and all that!

Now, what I really do not understand, is why, if you do not agree with our attempt, can you not just scroll on by. Why must you keep throwing out comments that suggest we are a rather ignorant and ranting bunch, just because we do not see and feel things the same as you. Are you really that superior? And are you sure you are that right? We can all learn from each other here.

Why argue and repeat, why not just let us be. We aren't hurting you, or any honest Amazon sellers. This is not a rant, I actually feel pretty calm. But I can be outspoken when it's about something I believe in.

 

David Gordon

8 Years Ago

@ Cathy Peek:

Well stated!

 

Melissa Bittinger

8 Years Ago

Below is what my comment was on the petition...if anyone cares! lol Basically, I think the system has room for improvement. Several posters apparently have not had the timely response and good experience Cynthia has had or keep having the same images repeatedly infringed on. This is particularly where I think Amazon and other sites might be able to step in and at least prevent the same image from showing up time after time....

I hear this story all too often the past couple of years I've been selling artwork online from way too many artist/photogs. I realize the copyright holder of any work does need to be the one to report and prove they are the copyright holder but it certainly sounds like there is a tremendous need for an improved system. Particularly to discourage or eliminate repeat offenders. I have reported more than my share of stolen images for sale on Amazon and other online selling sites back to the copyright holders just this past year alone. I'd hate to think that those same images popped back up for sale after being reported one or more times?! I like Amazon and I hope they will take the lead in this battle and try and find a better system that other selling sites could take notice of.

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"Why argue and repeat, why not just let us be."

I see you are leading by example :-) Why not just let those whose experience is vastly different from yours give you and others the benefit of that experience?


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

 

Floyd Snyder

8 Years Ago

"We aren't hurting you, or any honest Amazon sellers"

Read what I said about being careful what you wish for.

You just may end up doing more harm then good, to all of us.



 

Ricardo Almeida

8 Years Ago

"Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt" - The laws serve the vigilant, not those who sleep.

 

Cynthia Decker

8 Years Ago

" But they don't really actually have an item to sell, they are just using us to take the consumers money. Sorry, but I am just not okay with that. Not for us, and not for the consumer."

That wasn't the premise of any of this discussion thus far. The petition talked about the infringers actually selling product.

From Cathy (petition author's) quote:

"... If I remember correctly they have 273 reviews. I am going to assume a small percentage of customers will actually leave a review. Let's say it's 25%. That tells me they've had over a thousand sales. That's money that goes into their pockets, not mine. Money made off of my work. And Amazon is making it hard for me to go after them. "

If sellers are defrauding the public then that's a different matter. If your name is attached to the defrauding product then indeed I could see how that would be a problem. However that was not the basis of this discussion, and not at all what I was talking about. I feel like you're adjusting the scenario to suit your argument.

I've said my bit on the original statement and the petition, so I'll leave it at that.

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Nope, not me. Cindy is the author of the petition. But the first part of your post is a quote from me.

And the problem lies in both premises, and is done both ways. And in my case, yes, absolutely, they had my name, copied straight from the title, advertised as mine, and a right click image of an apron with my image, watermark and all, taken straight from Zazzle, and offered for sale and shipped from China. And sold much cheaper then what it sells for on Z or anything here. So yes, you bet I have a problem with that.

If the prior discussion did not cover that, it's because it can be very difficult sometimes to keep a discussion on track here. Thank you for seeing how this could be a problem. And also, when they use a low resolution of our image, and sell it cheap on their products, that indeed hurts us too. And silly me, I actually care about my customers. And I haven't changed the scenario to anything, but what I, me, not Cindy, has been saying from the start. Cindy's scenario is a bit different, but still hurts the public. And other artists have different scenarios as well, but it comes down to the same thing. These are being used illegally and without permission.

 

Joy McKenzie

8 Years Ago

Just found a direct copy of my Z image of a pillow of mine on a vendor's store on Amazon. I filed the DMCA ...and...Amazon published my public review of this pillow stating it is my image from another site, and that I just filed a DMCA notification, so remove it immediately. The selling price is about a third of what it is on Z. People have brass ones, I swear.

 

Susan Maxwell Schmidt

8 Years Ago

While I agree that current copyright laws are not going to allow this petition to get anywhere, and also agree that it is the artist who has to initiate an infringement complaint (as it should be), I do have a hard time with companies that have no sense of integrity whatsoever. Vendors who have multiple copyright infringements filed against their accounts should absolutely be banned from selling on Amazon permanently. I have about had it with the money grubbing, integrity lacking, every-company-for-itself methods that have become doing business in this country.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

Joy, Amazon put that in public? Wow things are changing. Perhaps they meant to message them

 

Joy McKenzie

8 Years Ago

Abbie...I think Amazon liked that I wrote that I was filing a DMCA notification with them, and not just ranting in anger. I just checked and my review is still up. I did get an email from Amazon stating they are processing my DMCA notice.

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

Apparently Amazon is now giving out the personal contact information of those who request to have their stolen work taken down. One artist has received email threats and threatening phone calls. {to the point where she has had to go to the police} Several zazzle artists have also been contacted by the thieves they filed complaints against. Back when I was sending in my DMCA notices, I was never contacted by the thieves. So this is a new thing, Amazon giving out personal info. Lovely...just lovely!

 

Joshua House

8 Years Ago

That seems like an incredible level of risk Amazon would be opening itself to.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

we do not do that here for privacy reasons

Terribly bad of Amazon to do this

 

Chrystyne Novack

8 Years Ago

Jai, you mentioned you never had the experience of being contacted by thieves after sending the DMCA notice....I wonder if it is just isolated incidents with specific infringers. What I mean by that is that I think (I am not 100% sure on this) that legally a business would have to supply contact info of the person filing DMCA if the Infringer contests the claim so that it then moves into the two parties having to settle the issue between themselves. *IF* this is the case, then this disclosure could be ripe for abuse. It would not surprise me that there are some Infringers/Thieves out there that know about this legality and are abusing it to harass and bully artists as scare tactics.

Jai, on the artists who are getting harassed - did they themselves also receive personal contact info from Amazon who the infringer is? I ask because if Amazon had to give their personal information to the Infringer because the claim was contested, I would think that the artist has the legal right to receive from Amazon that same personal contact information on the Infringer.

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"Apparently Amazon is now giving out the personal contact information of those who request to have their stolen work taken down."

I *hope* this is true. No one should be allowed to hurl an endless stream of anonymous accusations at someone without confrontation. Infringers, willful or not, are made out to be the worst kind of criminal here. Too many mild-mannered photographers, who wouldn't think of harming any living soul, would shut down a man's business and stand him in front of a firing squad without trial, explanation, or proof of intent. "He "stole" my picture."

Even though most infringement cases are civil (and therefore have no teeth whatsoever), hopefully Amazon's disclosure policy (if it's true) is an acknowledgment to the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees that during a criminal prosecution, defendants have the right to confront their accusers.


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

 

Joy McKenzie

8 Years Ago

Amazon has to at least inform the infringer which artwork/design has had a DMCA notification filed on. How much other info, I'm not sure. I'd like to know, Jai, where this information about Amazon giving out personal information came from? If Amazon shows that the artwork is for sale on Fine Art America and gives the URL, FAA gives you a way to contact the artist legally. Popular artists are on many sites and a lot of info can be gathered. You can leave a comment at an artist's Z store. I don't want to jump on this bandwagon without proof that Amazon actually gave out info like address, phone number, email addy, etc. which is what I consider 'personal information'.

BTW, it took 8 emails to finally get my pillow (direct copy of the pillow image from Z) taken down. I kept getting canned email responses from them that did not pertain to my problem. Only when I said that they could speak to my attorney next, did they finally take it down. I don't know if their DMCA notices are outsourced or what...but whoever the workers were that were responding to my very detailed emails had NO CLUE what I was talking about.

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

Chrystyne said: "Jai, on the artists who are getting harassed - did they themselves also receive personal contact info from Amazon who the infringer is? I ask because if Amazon had to give their personal information to the Infringer because the claim was contested, I would think that the artist has the legal right to receive from Amazon that same personal contact information on the Infringer."

I don't believe the artists received the infringers info, but I don't know for SURE. None of them have said they received the thieves info. They just seem stumped at how the thieves received THEIR info. I know when we sent our DMCA's, we *asked* for that info, as well as for an accounting of any sales of the infringing product, and Amazon refused to give us ANY information on the seller. All they did was remove the item.

Joy said: "I'd like to know, Jai, where this information about Amazon giving out personal information came from?"

There are several artists reporting in the last week or so that they are suddenly being contacted by the thieves. One artist in particular has been contacted by phone and she says her phone number is not available anywhere in public. She has received a viable death threat against her and her family via email (I saw the threat email) and has had to go to the police.

Where else would they be getting the information on how to contact the artists? We are required to submit it all to Amazon when we file the complaint. Maybe Amazon is actually sending the thieves copies of the complaints now? Maybe it is as Chrystyne said and that the claim was contested by a particular thief. I don't know the answer to that. All I know is some of the artists - who never contacted the thief directly, but instead filed DMCA's with Amazon only - are now being contacted by the thieves. And one I know in particular has been threatened...one threat by email and another by phone...and she has no clue how they got her private phone number (which Amazon has, because she had to include it in the DMCA).

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

To follow up...here's a copy of one email a thief sent to an artist - it is apparent from this, Amazon *is* giving out the info.

"Amazon tell us to contact to you,we really hope you can help us to contact Amazon at notice@amazon.com to withdraw your complaint,because really place great importance on this issue and we want to further sell on amazon. Although we are a new seller, and didn't make a lot of money so far, We would like to make compensation for you if you could tell us your paypal account. or you can tell us what can we do to help you,anything we can do we are willing to do. "

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

I think this is worthy of a piece on 1stAngel. I completely disagree with Dan's view of this as you do not give names, phone numbers and addresses on either side. That is completely against privacy laws, not to mention safety matters

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

Also, one of the artists reported "because the seller {thief} had contacted her, she now has their email address". So apparently the artists aren't being given the contact info of the seller...but the seller is being given the artist's contact info, and when (or if) they contact the artist, only then does the artist have any info on them.

As much as I dislike Dan's view, I do see his point.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

It should all be done through a legal department as our is

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

"As much as I dislike Dan's view, I do see his point."

Thank you, Jai. As much as it sounds to the contrary, *I* don't like commercial infringement either. But I absolutely cringe when I see photographers basically calling for the death penalty when their work is infringed. They can easily put people in very deep trouble -- sometimes innocent people -- without risk to themselves and without penalty if they are wrong.

The photographers, and no one else, need to bear 100% of the responsibility for making their low-rez images available to everyone on the planet with access to an internet connection. When they make it that easy, they can't be screaming bloody murder when someone takes the bait.

At some point in the not-too-distant future, somebody is going to scream bloody murder to the wrong person. And it's going to end very badly and be all over the news and cause a 900-post thread here on FAA. All because someone right-clicked on the wrong image.


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

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

and THAT is why It should all be done through a legal department as ours is

 

Greg Jackson

8 Years Ago

You have to dig a little bit to find their basic TOS about reporting an infringement. Here's a cut & paste from that page. Notine the last line of text under Secondary Contact Information at the bottom: (in bold type)

"Your Contact Details
This is the contact Amazon will use.

*Are you a seller on Amazon?
Yes No
*First Name

*Last Name

Company

*Address Line 1

Address Line 2

*City

State

*ZIP Code

*Country

*Phone Number

*E-mail Address

*Confirm E-mail Address

Secondary Contact Details
The contact details which we will provide to Third Party Sellers (if relevant) for queries regarding this notification."

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

Good. When someone wants to nail you to a cross, you should be able to identify the people with hammers.


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

 

Joy McKenzie

8 Years Ago

Thanks for the explanation, Jai! I appreciate you typing all that. Now...that is scary indeed! I didn't get any email or phone complaints from the seller of the infringed image (it was a pillow image from Z that they were stating that they are selling a pillowCASE of this image). I did check to see if they had it up again, and no...they don't. So at least they are following the rules so far. I feel very bad for that artist that is being harassed and stalked. (I would further explain...but this thread is not Private). In any case, someone gave out info that was not theirs to give out. BUT...since I've never contested a DMCA notification (never have gotten a DMCA notification to begin with), I don't know the parameters that surround that, as far as what info a contesting infringer gets in order to contact the artist. I do know you can contest the DMCA, but I believe Amazon would be taken out of the equation at that point.

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

Disclaimer, written not as a mod here but as artist and owner of online magazine............

I have just contacted them. This DOES concern me. It should all be done properly and properly does not mean sharing other members details, on either side

The law states that we have copyright and, if we find our work infringed upon we can, and should, contact the site with a legal DMCA. On a DMCA you have to put a lot of details (ours also) BUT, none of that information should be issued publically or to another member

The details on a DMCA about the art is then put to the other member and, if found correct, the work removed. If found false, or the work is legal, the alleged infirnger has a chance to put their case and the takedown is not put in place but the DMCA issuer is refused a take down

Simple. Nobodies personal details should be swapped.

I asked.........................

I am trying to contact someone in relation to news we have come by that Amazon is issuing other members with contact details, regarding DMCA's, and that at least one person has received threats over the telephone from someone Amazon supposedly gave these details to.

We would like to know if Amazon do send personal details to someone who is suspected of copyright infringement, of the person making the complaint, and in what way they justify this with reference to privacy of their members?

Are DMCAs and similar taken care of in private by a legal department, and if not, why not?

Will Amazon please give a statement regarding their copyright infringement policies and privacy issues in relation to these?

Thank you

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

By the way, they are not 'thieves' they are 'infringers'

 

Joy McKenzie

8 Years Ago

Thanks for doing that, Abbie! I hope you get a good answer, and quickly!

 

Cathy Peek

8 Years Ago

Thank you Abbie!

 

Jai Johnson

8 Years Ago

I'll be curious to see how Amazon responds to your letter Abbie! Thieves...infringers...just similar words to me. I was always taught when something takes something that isn't theirs, they are a thief. I know it's different in this case, but in my mind, it's my image, they took it, they are a thief. That's just the word I was brought up with in my vocabulary that fits the circumstance. In my DMCA's, where I have to sound all professional, I use the right wording (infringment, infringing, etc). :)

 

Dan Turner

8 Years Ago

" If found false, or the work is legal, the alleged infirnger has a chance to put their case and the takedown is not put in place but the DMCA issuer is refused a take down"

Not exactly. The law states that the takedown be executed immediately, without question. THEN the alleged infringer is notified. If he files a counter notice, the ISP notifies the original filer, then waits 10-14 business days for a lawsuit to be filed. If the complainer does not file a lawsuit, then the ISP is to put the material back up.

DMCA takedown notices are being widely abused. Competitors, for instance, can have all of your material (images, writings, videos, etc) removed immediately, without due process, without so much as a warning. It happens every day. Websites featuring news or time-crucial material are under constant attack. By the time they get their material back up, the sale is over or the news is stale.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act was supposed to make things easier for everyone, but it is having serious, unintended consequences.


Dan Turner

 

Abbie Shores

8 Years Ago

Yes Dan you are right but if found false it is put back.

 

This discussion is closed.