Subscribe and save with our all-new image subscriptions.

Learn more
Close

Google's New Image Search Facilitates Image Stealing

First pagePrevious pageof 5Next page
Displaying 61 to 80 of 96 matches.
Feverstockphoto
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 6:08PM
Nice read but just wondering is istock back to being our agent rather than our distributor? Confused dat com smile. Also we may not contact people we think are using our images.., illegally but notify istock? Sweet .

(Edited on 2013-02-05 18:15:25 by Feverstockphoto)
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 6:25PM
With this Google deal How can Istock or the contributer possibly know if the image is being used illegally. I can't see any way for you to know and take action.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 6:41PM

Posted By JodiJacobson:
With this Google deal How can Istock or the contributer possibly know if the image is being used illegally. I can't see any way for you to know and take action.


You can't know. The point is that Google is making it extremely easy for anyone to grab your image and commit infringement, and as well, what they are doing is likely illegal.
hatman12
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveRecognizing those who reach the 100,000 download mark
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 6:46PM

Isn't this an opportunity for PicScout?  Looking at it a different way, the increasing ease with which people can 'steal' images all over the web is the reason why Getty bought PicScout - to have a de facto copyright protection service that can identify misuse and capitalise on it?


Nobody is going to stop Google, or Pinterest, or Facebook etc.  We need to encourage and support Getty's implementation of PicScout so that whenever someone clicks to try to 'steal' our work the PicScout helpful warning box pops up with a message - 'the picture you are trying to copy is copyrighted.  You can buy a license to use this image by clicking the following link' etc.


Actually, when I think about it, don't we want our fingerprinted images popping up all over the place and giving links back to our agency?  Isn't this the concept behind PicScout?


It's a chicken and egg - in order for PicScout to become volume marketable, there has to be a reason.  And Google Drive,  Google search etc are surely great reasons why web sites shoulkd consider installing PicScout for joint revenue share.


I'm trying to imagine a time three or four years out when there are millions of PicScout warnings popping up all over the place, all giving helpful links back to our work (or denying access).  Surely this is the same dream the inventors of PicScout had, and the same dream Getty had when they bought it.
mlwinphotoCLOSED
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloads
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 7:29PM
In the meantime I've blocked Google searches from accessing my website.
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 7:50PM
I just don't understand why any of us has to be going through this turmoile. In all good faith, We bought expensive equipment, scouted out locations, traveled to get the right shot, found a distributer/agent that we trusted with our IP, spent hours on the computer editing,keywording and uploading and then have to be on the defence because our distributer made inappropriate decisions on our behalf without any consultation from us. I also don't understand why TPTB are telling us that Google is a bigger company then Getty and they are having trouble getting to the right people..Getty executivies call Google executivies..the same people you made the deal with and undo it. If that doesn't work, Getty Lawyers write to Google Lawyers and set up a meeting. How can Getty have trouble communicating with a company that is supposed to be a wonderful partner? How can Getty protect us if they can't instantly communicate with their partner. I think I have been very patient and I feel I am being given the run-a-round. What is the main job of our distributor? I thougt Getty  has a fiduciary responsibility to make us the most money they can and protect our IP. What am I missing?

(Edited on 2013-02-05 19:52:38 by JodiJacobson)
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:06PM
You're getting mixed up. This is not the Google Drive licensing deal. This is Google Image Search which indexes all images on the net and provides them via it's interface at high resolution.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:10PM

Posted By hatman12:
Isn't this an opportunity for PicScout?  Looking at it a different way, the increasing ease with which people can 'steal' images all over the web is the reason why Getty bought PicScout - to have a de facto copyright protection service that can identify misuse and capitalise on it?


Not really. That type of PicScout use is only for RM where you know where an image is supposed to be used, and if PS finds a use that isn't known, it can flag it.

Not being worried because a new software interface makes it easy to download and misuse images because all those illegally gotten images will pop up a PicScout pointer to iStock or wherever (if the plugin is installed) doesn't seem like the right way either. People who want to properly license images should have PicScout as one of their tools (the browser plugin) to identify where to purpose works they find and want to use. It doesn't help where people are breaking the rules.
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:26PM
I was a little mixed up there but it still comes down to the same thing. Getty and their lawyers are big enough to stop Google from indexing our work at a high resolution. I am with Getty because I thought Getty was big enough to enforce resolution rules.
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:30PM
Posted By mlwinphoto:
In the meantime I've blocked Google searches from accessing my website.

How do you do that...I would like to do that too.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 8:51PM

Posted By JodiJacobson:
I was a little mixed up there but it still comes down to the same thing. Getty and their lawyers are big enough to stop Google from indexing our work at a high resolution. I am with Getty because I thought Getty was big enough to enforce resolution rules.


Getty is just showing (albeit likely illegally) what is out there. It is the website owners and bloggers who do not resize down that are partly at fault.

Recently I contacted one site and asked them nicely to shrink their image to the standards, and they did.
JodiJacobson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 9:11PM
So how can Getty break their own internet size resolution rules. Why would they want to do that? Are their heads that far in the clouds to put a picture out at full resolution...Isn't that a little tempting to the people that have no reguard for licensing?
hatman12
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveRecognizing those who reach the 100,000 download mark
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 9:12PM
Posted By sjlocke:


Posted By hatman12:
Isn't this an opportunity for PicScout?  Looking at it a different way, the increasing ease with which people can 'steal' images all over the web is the reason why Getty bought PicScout - to have a de facto copyright protection service that can identify misuse and capitalise on it?



Not really. That type of PicScout use is only for RM where you know where an image is supposed to be used, and if PS finds a use that isn't known, it can flag it.

No, I don't think that's right.  I believe I read that all the Google Drive stuff had been fingerprinted, and that's not RM.  Surely PicScout works by being triggered by people who are on a web site and try to right click and copy.  The original purchaser isn't doing that, hence all of Getty's content, including iStock and Thinkstock can be protected.

I'd like to know more about Getty's plans for PicScout because I think it could be important and if so I'd like to at least give it some vocal support.
hatman12
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveRecognizing those who reach the 100,000 download mark
Posted Tue Feb 5, 2013 9:32PM

Well I read through the PicScout web site, and to be honest it wasn't really clear to me how it is intended to work.  The ImageExchange version applies to all works whether RF or RM but it isn't clear how unauthorised use is identified and monetised.  Hopefully this is just confusion on my part.  It seemed clear (at least in my mind) that the intention is to fingerprint and protect everything and trigger a PicScout info window on any copy attempt.  Naturally it can only work like that if web sites install the thing, which is presumably what Getty would like them all to do.


It's all very interesting and has the POTENTIAL to increase sales and revenue.  Depends how it's all handled.


Perhaps someone from Getty will pop in here and give an overview of the game plan.
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 4:47AM

Posted By hatman12:
It seemed clear (at least in my mind) that the intention is to fingerprint and protect everything and trigger a PicScout info window on any copy attempt.  Naturally it can only work like that if web sites install the thing, which is presumably what Getty would like them all to do.


ImageExchange is a browser plugin. The user has to have it installed before it does anything. Post-usage is a different program altogether. http://seanlockephotography.com/2013/01/22/picscout-fingerprinting/

(Edited on 2013-02-06 04:48:56 by sjlocke)
hatman12
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsExclusiveRecognizing those who reach the 100,000 download mark
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 5:47AM
Thanks for the blog link Sean.  I understand the various uses.  What's bothering me is that the most obvious use (to my mind) seems to be missing, and the post-usage thing isn't explained very well (also it doesn't explain WHO is billed).  I'd be surprised if this is an oversight, so perhaps there's more news to come (or it needs to get more established first).  What I imagined isn't covered by any of the PicScout explanations - a pop-up that requires the poster to license the image before posting together with a link to the purchase page.


Anyways, we'll see.

(Edited on 2013-02-06 06:01:16 by hatman12)
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 6:05AM
I believe FB or the platform gets billed, as they are using the content as fodder to draw in eyeballs. ie., allowing them to use user uploading content legally is a benefit to them.
jtyler
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 6:33AM
Posted By JodiJacobson:

Posted By mlwinphoto:
In the meantime I've blocked Google searches from accessing my website.


How do you do that...I would like to do that too.


Me three
JBryson
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 6:43AM
Posted By spfoto:
One of the things I notice is that the images I found that were large or full size, (above the allowed max 1200 x 800) were mostly from blogers, I wonder if a discusion could be had with Blogger, Wordpress and the like to limit image size?

(Edited on 2013-02-05 17:23:26 by spfoto)

It seriously makes me wonder why a blogger would license a large or full size image....very suspicious of that.
Andyd
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistThis member has lost their last cage match. Consider this the black eye the bully gave you after school by the bike racks.
Posted Wed Feb 6, 2013 6:52AM
Stopping Google from indexing your images would require a robots.txt file adding to your website.


Here's how http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35308


I wouldn't stop the general Google crawer unless you don't want any traffic from Google at all.

(Edited on 2013-02-06 08:47:55 by Andyd)
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 5Next page
Displaying 61 to 80 of 96 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)