Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
Thread started 16 Jun 2011 (Thursday) 09:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Realtor is stealing my images!!!

 
whitesell
Senior Member
Avatar
361 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: St. Albert, AB Canada
     
Jun 17, 2011 08:39 as a reply to  @ post 12608178 |  #16

File formal DMCA complaints with the web hosting provider and with Google. He will be forced to take them down or the web hosting provider will shut off the entire website, and Google will ban the site from their search results. I've gone this route and it definately works. Read up on it, do your research - the formal complaint has to be formatted a very specific way so the hosting provider and Google take action.

Regards,
Jim


Edmonton portrait photographer (external link)
Google Business Photos Edmonton (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MurthaLawfirm
Junior Member
Avatar
24 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Babylon, New York
     
Jun 17, 2011 09:35 |  #17

Please don't do anything until you speak with your attorney.


Photographers' Rights Blog (external link)
And for the love of god, REGISTER your photos! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
riotshield
Senior Member
425 posts
Joined Apr 2011
     
Jun 17, 2011 13:45 |  #18

Photo Flyer wrote in post #12608178 (external link)
Sorry, I'd rather not. Especially if I end up taking him to court.

It is with a large company and I have tried to contact the owner with no avail. What about sending a bill and putting a lien on the property? That would make the homeowners angry at him for letting it go this far.

PF.

I'm doubtful there will be any legal right in this case to put a lien on the property. You could record one, but might be on the hook for something called "slander of title" by the homeowner later.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PhotosGuy
Moderator
Avatar
75,866 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 2516
Joined Feb 2004
Location: Middle of Michigan
     
Jun 17, 2011 14:56 |  #19

Ask a Copyright Lawyer Law. (external link)

Carolyn Wright
Blog: http://www.photoattorn​ey.com/ (external link)


FrankC - 20D, RAW, Manual everything...
Classic Carz, Racing, Air Show, Flowers.
Find the light... A few Car Lighting Tips, and MOVE YOUR FEET!
Have you thought about making your own book? // Need an exposure crutch?
New Image Size Limits: Image must not exceed 1600 pixels on any side.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fortisi876
Senior Member
493 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2006
Location: NNJ
     
Jun 17, 2011 18:28 |  #20

riotshield wrote in post #12610638 (external link)
I'm doubtful there will be any legal right in this case to put a lien on the property. You could record one, but might be on the hook for something called "slander of title" by the homeowner later.

Beat me to it, you can't blame the homeowners for the realtors stupidity.....at least I wouldn't think you can.


I've just discovered an image of mine being used in a similar fashion so I'm subscribed to this thread as well.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
galaxyfinder
Member
Avatar
47 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: WI
     
Jun 17, 2011 20:10 as a reply to  @ fortisi876's post |  #21

Subscribe


Canon 7D-30D~Canon 70-200 f/4L~Canon 50 f/1.4~Tamron 17-50 f/2.8~Tamron 28-75 f/2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Simonthephotoman
Member
130 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Toronto Canada
     
Jun 17, 2011 20:38 |  #22

Show up at his house..... that would freak him out, Hire somebodey to follow him 24/7 :)


Gear: Canon 50D T1i Gripped(For sale)
Glass: Nikon 35 2.8 PC, Olympus 20 f/2 Olympus 24 2.8 Tamron 17-50 2.8, canon 70-200 F/4L, Canon 50 1.8
A 14 year old photographer.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dylanhauge
Member
64 posts
Joined May 2010
     
Jun 18, 2011 00:35 |  #23

impact_blu wrote in post #12604032 (external link)
Find out where his office is and have a talk with his broker.

This. I'm sure his/her boss would like to hear about this.


1D | 50D | 300D | EF-S 18-55 IS | EF 50mm 1.8 MKII | EF 70-200mm F4L | EF 28-135 USM | 430ex II | Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WMS
"Escargot on the Hoof"
Avatar
2,884 posts
Joined Nov 2006
Location: California, the land of the politicaly corrupt and innept
     
Jun 18, 2011 06:16 |  #24

Another excellent example of why we all should register our copyrights on images which will be posted on the web.

Wayne


I'm just a simple maker of love charms and tokens,who occasionally takes a picture or two.
Gear list: more toys than I need, Fewer than I want.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
atlrus
Senior Member
Avatar
531 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 18, 2011 10:41 as a reply to  @ WMS's post |  #25

At this point I would definitelly go after money, rather than just taking the photo down (through talking with his boss/web hosting/Google etc). It appears your image has been running with the ad for quite a while, despite your request to have it taken down, and you should get paid for it.

If the new realtor is from a different company than the one you originally shot the house for - it seems you have an open and shut case.

P.S. If you take him to Judge Judy I would definitelly DVR that :)


Gear: Sold :cry:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim_pb09
Hatchling
9 posts
Joined Aug 2007
     
Jun 19, 2011 10:47 |  #26

great post




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phil ­ V
Goldmember
1,977 posts
Likes: 75
Joined Jan 2005
Location: S Yorks UK
     
Jun 19, 2011 11:51 |  #27

WMS wrote in post #12614476 (external link)
Another excellent example of why we all should register our copyrights on images which will be posted on the web.

Wayne

Nope, another example of why the US Govt should simply accept that the Berne convention is sufficient and remove the necessity of secondary registration. Effectively they've weakened international copyright law.;)

To the OP, send them a bill and send a copy to the parent company with a note regarding the possibility of a take down notice. They'll tear him a new one and you'll get paid.


Gear List
website: South Yorkshire Wedding photographer in Doncaster (external link)
Twitter (external link)Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nightstalker
Goldmember
1,666 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Feb 2007
Location: North West UK
     
Jun 19, 2011 11:54 |  #28

atlrus wrote in post #12615189 (external link)
If the new realtor is from a different company than the one you originally shot the house for - it seems you have an open and shut case.

Yes and no. Surely it depends on the details of the agreement with the first realtor and on the specifics of the licence that was sent with the images in the first place.

I can easily see a situation where the homeowner sees the shot and asks "can I have a copy of that". Later the homeowner passes on the photo to the new realtor not knowing that he is effectively doing something wrong.

It could well be that the first realtor passed the images on to the home owner who then passed it on to the new company believing that he was doing no wrong.

The blame could therefore lie with :

1 - the initial realtor for exceeding the terms of his licence (if indeed he did) by letting the home owner have a copy
2 - compounded by the home owner passing on the image (in his mind legally) because it is unlikely that the initial realtor would have bothered giving him a copy of the licence or sublicinsing
3 - the second realtor for illegally downloading the image from the first realtors site

There are probably a few other options as well...

Definately not a cut and dried case IMHO.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
atlrus
Senior Member
Avatar
531 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 19, 2011 14:27 |  #29

Nightstalker wrote in post #12620180 (external link)
Yes and no. Surely it depends on the details of the agreement with the first realtor and on the specifics of the licence that was sent with the images in the first place.

I can easily see a situation where the homeowner sees the shot and asks "can I have a copy of that". Later the homeowner passes on the photo to the new realtor not knowing that he is effectively doing something wrong.

It could well be that the first realtor passed the images on to the home owner who then passed it on to the new company believing that he was doing no wrong.

The blame could therefore lie with :

1 - the initial realtor for exceeding the terms of his licence (if indeed he did) by letting the home owner have a copy
2 - compounded by the home owner passing on the image (in his mind legally) because it is unlikely that the initial realtor would have bothered giving him a copy of the licence or sublicinsing
3 - the second realtor for illegally downloading the image from the first realtors site

There are probably a few other options as well...

Definately not a cut and dried case IMHO.

You are definitelly making it more complicated than it actually is. The second realtor has absolutely NO excuse, considering that the OP had already informed him that he is using the image without permission. So even if your scenario is correct, the realtor should have taken the image down or simply paid the guy the going fee.

If I was in the OP's shoes I would take the guy to a small-claims court (whatever the equivalent in his jurisdiction), present the judge with copies of all requests for taking down the image, copy of the image on the website (still not taken down after numerous requests), my image copyright and a document showing the average going rate for similar images, then request to be paid that average rate.

There is really no need to involve a lawyer at this point. Chances are you'd be granted the money 99% of the time.


Gear: Sold :cry:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WMS
"Escargot on the Hoof"
Avatar
2,884 posts
Joined Nov 2006
Location: California, the land of the politicaly corrupt and innept
     
Jun 19, 2011 15:48 |  #30

Phil V wrote in post #12620166 (external link)
Nope, another example of why the US Govt should simply accept that the Berne convention is sufficient and remove the necessity of secondary registration. Effectively they've weakened international copyright law.;)

To the OP, send them a bill and send a copy to the parent company with a note regarding the possibility of a take down notice. They'll tear him a new one and you'll get paid.

Phil the US does recognize the Berne convention, in addition The US allows additional protection for those who choose to take the additional step of registering there works in the form of STATUTORY damages. This way the owner of Intellectual Property does not need to prove actual damages. And this is a big deal. In a case like this one the owner would not need to show that the photographs actually have value in the market place.

Wayne


I'm just a simple maker of love charms and tokens,who occasionally takes a picture or two.
Gear list: more toys than I need, Fewer than I want.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,598 views & 0 likes for this thread
Realtor is stealing my images!!!
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos The Business of Photography 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is tnt2112
1089 guests, 355 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.