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 13 Aug 2014 (Wednesday) 18:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Never ever point out a fraud...

 
sspellman
Goldmember
Avatar
1,731 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Detroit, Michigan
     
Aug 14, 2014 21:04 |  #31

Some advice:
1) Let Shutterstock or the actual owner of the misused photos police themselves. It good to contact the owners and make them aware of the issue, but its not your property or decision to make.
2) Your message on their website is a direct attack and you should expect people to react badly and aggressively. Do not say anything online that you would not say in person to their face.

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

― Mark Twain

3) Missused photos are best reported on a website such as Photo Stealers http://stopstealingpho​tos.com/ (external link) This will keep it less personal and reduce the backlash.
4) The multiple false and harassing reviews should be handled by a real lawyer.
5) The OP seems highly concerned with the actions of other people in a situation that she was not originally involved. Almost all successful people focus their positive energy on their own progress, and don't let themselves get stuck in the mud of drama of others. I hope the OP would strongly rethink her actions here and try to avoid wasting so much time and inciting so much negativity to her business.


ScottSpellmanMedia.com [photography]

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
LisaJH
Goldmember
Avatar
1,887 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2253
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Kingman, Arizona - United States
     
Aug 14, 2014 21:20 |  #32

I'm totally confused here - did you do business with this person to warrant the review you left of their business? Or was the 1 star review simply the result of them using unauthorized Shutterstock photos? Were these your photos? Again, I'm a bit lost here. It's honestly best to, not to be crass, but mind your own business in these types of situations. If you absolutely MUST say something, contact Shutterstock and let them know about it so that they can handle it themselves.


~Mom of 11 and Professional Photographer~
5DIV | 5DIII | 5DII | 40D | 400L | 200L | 70-200L II | 85L | 50 1.0L | 50 1.2L | Sigma 50mm Art Lens | 16-35L II | TS-E 90 | 100 Macro | Random Lensbaby & OCF Gear
Website (external link) | Blog (external link) | Facebook (external link) | 500px (external link) | Instagram (external link) | Twitter (external link) | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LisaJH
Goldmember
Avatar
1,887 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2253
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Kingman, Arizona - United States
     
Aug 14, 2014 21:21 |  #33

sspellman wrote in post #17096941 (external link)
Some advice:
1) Let Shutterstock or the actual owner of the misused photos police themselves. It good to contact the owners and make them aware of the issue, but its not your property or decision to make.
2) Your message on their website is a direct attack and you should expect people to react badly and aggressively. Do not say anything online that you would not say in person to their face.

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.”

― Mark Twain

3) Missused photos are best reported on a website such as Photo Stealers http://stopstealingpho​tos.com/ (external link) This will keep it less personal and reduce the backlash.
4) The multiple false and harassing reviews should be handled by a real lawyer.
5) The OP seems highly concerned with the actions of other people in a situation that she was not originally involved. Almost all successful people focus their positive energy on their own progress, and don't let themselves get stuck in the mud of drama of others. I hope the OP would strongly rethink her actions here and try to avoid wasting so much time and inciting so much negativity to her business.

Yes, yes, and yes.


~Mom of 11 and Professional Photographer~
5DIV | 5DIII | 5DII | 40D | 400L | 200L | 70-200L II | 85L | 50 1.0L | 50 1.2L | Sigma 50mm Art Lens | 16-35L II | TS-E 90 | 100 Macro | Random Lensbaby & OCF Gear
Website (external link) | Blog (external link) | Facebook (external link) | 500px (external link) | Instagram (external link) | Twitter (external link) | Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 14, 2014 23:10 |  #34

MattPharmD wrote in post #17096911 (external link)
The first "false review" doesn't claim anything that isn't true. The images are verifiably from shutterstock, and Shutterstocks license does not allow images to be used in this manner. A statement must be false before it can be Libel.

...it isn't your place, my place or the OP's place to determine if the photographer has violated the licence with shutterstock. Thats up to shutterstock. If shutterstock say "nope, thats fine" then its fine: and the OP's "review" is now a lie.

The other photographer claimed the OP ruined her wedding. This is a false statement that is damaging to her reputation (definition of libel). So my defination of libel (actually Merriam-Webster's) does not include the OP's post.

If shutterstock decides there is no licence violation: then the OP's statement is also false. And while it fits the "dictionary" definition of libel, dictionary definitions are worthless in court. At the moment the last thing the OP should be doing is escalating. They have reported it to shutterstock. If they don't take action, then the OP should remove the review and just leave it all alone. (In fact, I'd just remove the review, but I wouldn't have posted it in the first place.)


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattPharmD
Senior Member
Avatar
255 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2011
     
Aug 15, 2014 17:10 |  #35

Just wanted to point out that the offending photos are now gone (last 24hours) and the OP's review was gone the first time I looked at the page (although their are others of a similar vein).


Photography is just a hobby for me.
Twitter: @PharmNerdMatt (external link)
Youtube:The PharmNerd (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gaarryy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,191 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2010
Location: The Colony-- texas
     
Aug 15, 2014 17:34 |  #36

To the OP. What prompted you to go look at their page in the first place? What was your motivation for calling them out?
While what they did does seem like an overkill, YOU were the one that initiated it. Why? Do you normally go around looking at others websites looking for potential photo's that are not theirs?


---------------Camera, Lens, Flash stuff.. but still wanting more

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
Aug 15, 2014 18:25 |  #37

Don't fight other people's battles. Inform the photographers who shot the images and let them deal with it.


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattPharmD
Senior Member
Avatar
255 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2011
     
Aug 15, 2014 18:56 |  #38

For as critical as people are about this activity, this isn't really any different than websites like stopstealingphotos.com except the author of that website is possibly making more money off ads than it takes to run the site.


Photography is just a hobby for me.
Twitter: @PharmNerdMatt (external link)
Youtube:The PharmNerd (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digirebelva
Goldmember
Avatar
3,999 posts
Gallery: 376 photos
Likes: 1680
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Virginia
     
Aug 15, 2014 19:45 |  #39

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #17098828 (external link)
Don't fight other people's battles. Inform the photographers who shot the images and let them deal with it.

+1 this


EOS 6d, 7dMKII, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 16-28, Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8, Sigma 17-50 F/2.8, Canon 24-70mm F/2.8L, Canon 70-200 F/2.8L, Mixed Speedlites and other stuff.

When it ceases to be fun, it will be time to walk away
Website (external link) | Fine Art America (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
seanlockephotography
Member
67 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2014
     
Aug 15, 2014 20:34 |  #40

MattPharmD wrote in post #17098860 (external link)
For as critical as people are about this activity, this isn't really any different than websites like stopstealingphotos.com except the author of that website is possibly making more money off ads than it takes to run the site.

What? Makes no sense.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mpix345
Goldmember
2,870 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Dec 2006
     
Aug 15, 2014 21:59 |  #41

This falls under the heading "Don't go looking for trouble -- you might find it."


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banquetbear
Goldmember
Avatar
1,601 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 156
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Aug 15, 2014 23:33 |  #42

MattPharmD wrote in post #17098860 (external link)
For as critical as people are about this activity, this isn't really any different than websites like stopstealingphotos.com except the author of that website is possibly making more money off ads than it takes to run the site.

...the difference is that the author of stopstealingphotos.com has more experience at doing this, is used to the attacks that you get when you go after a photostealer, and is less likely to make a mistake that leaves them open to libel. And if they make a bit of money for all the effort they go through then good for them.


www.bigmark.co.nzexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
seanlockephotography
Member
67 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2014
     
Aug 18, 2014 05:49 |  #43

So, no word from the OP why this vendetta against another business?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BarrySpug
Member
97 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
     
Aug 25, 2014 18:09 |  #44

seanlockephotography wrote in post #17102905 (external link)
So, no word from the OP why this vendetta against another business?

I'm starting to think there is more to this than the OP let on initially. As others have said and asked, why would OP go after this business in the first place?

OP, if you're still actively posting, please give us the full explanation for clarity.


Canon 7D gripped | EF-S 18-135mm | EF 50mm 1.8 | EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II | Steady hand | Fingers Crossed

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
51,885 posts
Gallery: 190 photos
Likes: 8759
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Aug 25, 2014 18:26 |  #45

These people are creeps. They got caught with their pants down and get defensive and in fact offensive.

Clearly from how they operate they are not endowed with honor, and thus, the only safe option is avoiding them.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

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

11,458 views & 0 likes for this thread
Never ever point out a fraud...
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 potatopicker21
670 guests, 290 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.