Never ever point out a fraud...

They will go all high school drama on you....

Let me see if I'm following. You pointed out on their page that they're using stock photos to represent themselves and they manufactured phoney negative reviews against you ? Jesus--seriously ?

That seems a bit overkill on Michelle C's end. How disgusting.

"please inform me how you would like to proceed"-- I can'e believe they had the nerve to say it that way...as if its a threat.

Well leaving a review on their website may not be the best way to go about it. Though something similar just happened with another forum member, but she also had a significant online following to back her up.

DMCA takedown notice would probably fare better. But what's done is done - save all correspondence and keep it on file.

If you're feeling particularly nasty you could submit what you posted to a few photography news sites...

Christopher Steven b wrote in post #17094585
Let me see if I'm following. You pointed out on their page that they're using stock photos to represent themselves and they manufactured phoney negative reviews against you ? Jesus--seriously ?

Exactly. & They are still using some of the photos.

sarahashleyphotos wrote in post #17094579
I was able to pretty much diffuse the situation since I can reply to and report the false reviews.

Tell me more about the diffuser you used.

Apart from that, aren't there laws about defamation and libel?

Well frankly, that aspect is less concerning to me than the fact that an angry photographer can attempt to savage another's reputation with a few clicks.

sarahashleyphotos wrote in post #17094593
Exactly. & They are still using some of the photos.

joeblack2022 wrote in post #17094592
Well leaving a review on their website may not be the best way to go about it. Though something similar just happened with another forum member, but she also had a significant online following to back her up.

DMCA takedown notice would probably fare better. But what's done is done - save all correspondence and keep it on file.

If you're feeling particularly nasty you could submit what you posted to a few photography news sites...

Unfortunately on facebook to report copyright infringement it has to be your image.

My mind is just kind of blown. It's bad enough you are going after peoples WEDDINGS, a day where they incur a lot of expense and can't easily repeat using stolen images.

But because you were discovered your response is then to create a false review of a service you never used. Not once, but multiple times? Seems like that lady is a pro at filling herself with hate.

sarahashleyphotos wrote in post #17094602
Unfortunately on facebook to report copyright infringement it has to be your image.

I see, I thought they were your images. I wonder if Shutterstock would pursue?

Archibald wrote in post #17094595
Tell me more about the diffuser you used.

Apart from that, aren't there laws about defamation and libel?

Like I said on most review websites your can publicly reply to them (I simply said it was a fake review. That I had never worked with or met the person.) and a few have taken them down for review after I had reported them as being fake.

joeblack2022 wrote in post #17094610
I see, I thought they were your images. I wonder if Shutterstock would pursue?

I had contacted them with no response yet.

...it is quite possible they purchased those images: or maybe even provided those images for stock.

If you are going to accuse someone of fraud publicly: make sure you are sure of your case first. If you are unsure, send them to a site like Stop Stealing Photos and let them do the legwork.

banquetbear wrote in post #17094642
...it is quite possible they purchased those images: or maybe even provided those images for stock.

If you are going to accuse someone of fraud publicly: make sure you are sure of your case first. If you are unsure, send them to a site like Stop Stealing Photos and let them do the legwork.

Under the rules at shutterstock even if purchased they can not be used to advertise as if they are a product (Meaning photographers cant say they photographed them or imply it). Ill have to find that bit again.

Edit: Found it.

"PART II
RESTRICTIONS
YOU MAY NOT:

19. Falsely represent, expressly or by way of reasonable implication, that any Image was created by you or a person other than the copyright holder(s) of that Image."
http://www.shutterstoc​k.com/licensing.mhtml

sarahashleyphotos wrote in post #17094649
Under the rules at shutterstock even if purchased they can not be used to advertise as if they are a product (Meaning photographers cant say they photographed them or imply it). Ill have to find that bit again.

...if thats the case, report them to shutterstock, and if shutterstock wants to go after her for violating their terms of use, then they can. If they choose to ignore it, thats their choice. But are you sure she didn't take those images and sell them for stock? If your answer is "I don't know", then you shouldn't have called them out before finding out for sure.