Check out this site. The link is to a lot of Artie's work.
http://www.fotosimagen.com/imagen.ph...s+Birds+as+Art
We are all being ripped off.
Jim
Printable View
Check out this site. The link is to a lot of Artie's work.
http://www.fotosimagen.com/imagen.ph...s+Birds+as+Art
We are all being ripped off.
Jim
Quite the 'collection', almost 1000 of Artie's images and there are quite a few of my images, too. Is this some kind of image search engine?
Lots of mine as well :(
Axel. For searching try TinEye !
I did this a while ago and nothing came up, I have to try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfred Forns
More research should be done before claiming it's theft. Granted, I don't know what the language bits written say but as far as content, the dozen or so I looked at, none of the images were stored on that site and all display directly from the sites they are hosted on and the one you linked is like a referrer site.
Two examples:
http://www.fotosimagen.com/img.php?t...e-_o0w9158.jpg
This one points to an image on http://blog.livebooks.com which Artie may or may not have published legitimate content, I don't know. The first part of the link (http://www.fotosimagen.com/img.php?t=Arthur%20Morris%20Birds%20as%20Art&img=" displays the annoying header/search bar/ad bar at the top with Arthur Morris Birds as Art filled out for you in the search text box. It in itself does not display or host any images swiped.
and
http://www.fotosimagen.com/img.php?t...ro-Bay,-CA.jpg
This one points to an image hosted directly on Artie's site, Birds as Art here: http://www.birdsasart.com/248/Turkey...ro-Bay,-CA.jpg
Again, the first part of the link is only used for the annoying bar at the top.
Take out the first link part and it's just as if you typed in the direct link to the photo on Artie's site.
Google Images does a similar thing. This link shows the same image and even MORE content:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...26tbs%3Disch:1
Is Google ripping us off?
Aren't they offering them as wallpaper?
Here's one of the wallpaper ones:
http://www.fondos5.com/imagen.php?ta.../spoonbill.jpg
Goes directly to http://www.birdsasart.com/spoonbill.jpg which is a convenient 2592x3888 resolution image directly on the site (Artie's). IE or Firefox allow me to save as a wallpaper with a R-Click - Set as Desktop Background or Set as Background.
Google equivalent:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...26tbs%3Disch:1
Still see something wrong with it Chris?
They do give them away but shouldn't the owner of the image have something to say? Once you post an image you are fair game?
Actually, no, not yet. From what I see so far, they are doing nothing really that Google isn't already doing and I haven't heard any complaints about them. They're not giving it away, they're showing you what's out there that people are putting out there. Just like Google. The owner DOES have a say in it, don't post what you don't want search engines to find, make it so the search engines can't find it, or make it so the images aren't such high resolution that they would make good backgrounds for people.
Again, I don't know what the writing says since I haven't taken the time to pass it through a translator. Seeing how it's registered by someone in Peru and hosted on a Nigerian server, they're probably trying to make money from it some how but I was just referring to how the content is being presented as being nothing out of the ordinary. I dont' know what their laws are there but I'd wager they don't follow the US ones so threatening DMCA like is most common would probably only humor them. Now the ones that are using the fondos5.com server for the first part, you can freely fire away all your DMCA letters for linking to your freely searchable data to that host, it's US based. :)
I'm not going to go into the whole copyright infringement doesn't equal theft bit :)
I realize I'm in the minority here but I usually am. I'm use to it :D :D
Avoid potential computer problems. Don't click on the link. I was told I won something after clicking on one of the images at the site when investigating it.
Chris basically what you are saying in comparison ... if I have an item stolen from my car home etc. it is my fault because I bought it ... if I hadn't bought it then it could not have been stolen :( ... sure makes a lot of sense :(
... btw if you take any of my images and let people use it as wallpaper without my consent it is stolen ..oh forgot your theory.
A while back some bird club were using our images as avatars and they were removed.
You could just enjoy driving it. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kes
I think if the images are saved for web as low-res jpgs, there is not much people could do with them anyway. As for publishing, there may be as many reasons as people who post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kes
Just a reminder -- one line of defense against theft for-profit, as we all know, is to post the lowest resolution images possible to achieve your posting purpose.
I've resigned myself to the fact that anything I post to the web can be 'borrowed' without my permission.
Perhaps one day, a wise software engineer will create a workable barrier to prevent this. And become fabulously wealthy as a result. :)
ADDENDUM: Axel, I see you were typing, at the same time I was, about low-rez images ! Sorry for duplicating the thought, but I'll retain my comments.
Peter,Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kes
In the case of the car, it is fine if people look, but if someone drives the car off, it is theft.
Same with images. People can look at them on your web site, but if they use them for other purposes, it is theft.
It is theft whether they hot link or not. I have had many images stolen from my web site, and many people hot link to my images. I have even had people submit my images to online contests, with my copyright on it! If it is a personal web page, I usually do not bother to get them to take it down (too many to bother). But if the site is selling, I do go after them. I have gotted a number of sites taken down. Theft is theft.
Roger
Its a good idea to register all images, does no take that long just need to be organized !!! ... famous last words !!! :)
Just checked the link and it looks like the host is not allowing access to the site.
You're not understanding what I'm trying to explain. Is Google stealing the images? No. They are providing links to the contents and showing you where it is. The images are not stored there. That's what I saw this other site doing, just in a different form. It even showed you exactly where the content was published at. It didnt' modify anything or try to present it as somebody else's images.
They're not hosting/storing/copying the images.
The car analogy is incorrect. It's not theft. Theft involves removing something from somebody and they no longer have use of whatever was removed. Copying an image as a background or saving an image found DOES NOT deprive the person from future use of that image and they still have it. They haven't lost anything so it's not theft. Copyright infrigement is not equal to theft. Photo coyping a page in a book or article in a magazine for personal use isn't either.
You all want exposure for your photos so people can find and buy them but are upset when image search engines show you what's out there? Everyone better stop posting links the internal links to articles they find on other site or links to canon firmware or other software updates. We better just say "Go to Canon's site to download the file" instead and provide no assistance to where that file is. Also, we better not post any more screen grabs of Photoshop menus or windows, we don't want to steal Adobe's hard work by sharing what it looks like. Better not print those articles you find online without asking the site first either, they might not allow it to be in a printable format. Oh, don't use any add-ons that remove advertisements either, the site didn't give you permission to modify their online presentation of their contents so it's more enjoyable for you to read or browse. Don't save those RSS articles offline for later perusal or archives either. And please don't skip the commercials on your DVR recorded shows....
Yes, stealing is wrong. Yes copyright infringement is wrong. NO, providing a directory or link to the contents isn't.
The nature of the internet is to provide data and information to people, that's what search engines do.
The car/image metaphors might not be too helpful. To me it seems that the laws against copyright infringement are quite outdated, at least here, and the lines are quite blurry.
Hi all: The leading case on this issue is Perfect 10, Inc. v. Google, Inc. out of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In that case, the 9th Circuit said that Google's use of thumbnails was fair use after applying a fact specific analysis.
Here's a link to the decision which hopefully works and might be interesting to some:
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/Pe...Cir12-2007.pdf
Rachel
is it just me or is the site no longer working?
Peter - The site is still working from the link in post #1.
Rachel
ooo perhaps they changed access from the UK
i get this
"
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /imagen.php on this server."
hmm...
in fact now i got this...
"Is Google ripping us off?"
YES, Big Time.
Google and others should not be allowed to display small images they do not own without written permission and possible payment of fees. Doing so as they do does not allow us any control over our own work.
They put our work where they want and say it is a 'service'. I would NEVER licence use of my work anywhere near some of the ads they have on their links and site. They use my/yours/our works for profit no matter how they couch it. Thieves is what they are/.<!-- / message -->
If you don't want it linked or thumbnails displayed. No one is forcing you to license it. Don't put the content out there or don't give the search engines access to it. Google freely supplies the information on how to exclude here: http://www.google.com/support/webmas...n&answer=35308
In some countries it could be considered copyright infringement (again, NOT theft), but it's considered fair use in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use An appeals court already agreed and Google won that one vs Perfect 10 - http://www.out-law.com/page-8065. Google also won in a German court against another artist http://www.out-law.com/default.aspx?page=10980 "The Federal Court ruled, though, that the use of the images was not copyright infringement in the first place because the artist had effectively consented to the use of the images." Notice it's not mentioned as being called "theft" in the rulings either.
I wouldn't doubt there being others. Insist on it being changed? Time to lawyer up then and good luck. I hope your pockets are deeper than Google's, Microsoft's, Yahoo's, or any of the other search engines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Smith
