Theft

[JDub]

Ok, quick question. A recent bride I just photographed, took all the pictures from the online gallery, and posted them to her myspace without my approval. The bad thing, is the pics had a watermark and they were smart enough to remove the watermark!! Which pissed me off. So I dont even get free advertising. I emailed the bride to KINDLY take them down, no response in a few days. My question now, is I contacted myspace to report this, and get them down, but is there a real way to prevent this stuff? I have the images on backprint which if you right click save it saves a blank picture. I guess print screen is a stealer's friend! I have done hundreds of weddings, and this is the first time this has happened (that I know of). Its frustrating.

Thanks!

[photodoug]

stupid should hurt.

small claims court time....easy case.

[chuckinsocal]

That they had to resort to taking screen shots of the photos and that they went through the trouble to remove the watermarks are clear indications to me that they knew they were stealing the photos. I have to go with Doug and say take them to small claims court. The filing fees are cheap enough and being served with the court summons will surely get their attention as to the seriousness of the situation. My bet is that they will rather settle out of court than have to go to trial and risk a judgement which will show on thier credit report for the next 7 years or so and be on the public record for ever. You can recover your filing fees and other costs in the settlement.

I sued someone in small claims court several years ago and the other side actually paid me more in the settlement than they would have had they lost in court. They weren't afraid to stick it to you so don't you be afraid to stick it to them.

Go for it. It'll be a piece of cake.

Chuck Cannova
http://chuckinsocal.SmugMug.com

[bham]

Ok, quick question. A recent bride I just photographed, took all the pictures from the online gallery, and posted them to her myspace without my approval. The bad thing, is the pics had a watermark and they were smart enough to remove the watermark!! Which pissed me off. So I dont even get free advertising. I emailed the bride to KINDLY take them down, no response in a few days. My question now, is I contacted myspace to report this, and get them down, but is there a real way to prevent this stuff? I have the images on backprint which if you right click save it saves a blank picture. I guess print screen is a stealer's friend! I have done hundreds of weddings, and this is the first time this has happened (that I know of). Its frustrating.

Thanks!

I am curious as to why you don't use your smugmug site for the photos?

After a few things such as this happened, I then started using the tiled watermark on all my photos. Once they purchase the files, if they choose to, then I post remove watermarks, but only then.

[JDub]

Thanks for the comments and tips! So far myspace has taken down a few, but not all. And still no email from the bride. Also, I think its important to note the contract states "no images to be used online, unless you purchase a digital download" and all that good stuff. So a double violation. I really hate to take someone to court, but I think it would be just in this situation. Only thing Im worried about is the potential negative publicity/backlash. But then again they did stick it to me like you said, so we will see. I am sure this topic has come up many times here, sorry for a duplicate-type post if so. Its just extremely frustrating.

Oh and they are on smugmug. As well as backprint. I dont have a pro smug account yet, but when I do, I will ditch backprint and use smug exclusively w/watermarks. The tiled watermark is a great idea. Do you have a sample? Should I upload ALL images with tiled watermarks to backprint and the originals in private galleries on smugmug for the time being? I know smugmug doesn't advertise itself as this, but I use smugmug as online storage of ALL originals (and I love ya'll - smugmug).

[bham]

Sorry to lazy to go throught the trouble to repost but look in this thread. One of mine is there with some others. If you need advice on doing one and or questions how I did mine let me know.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=86506

Also see this other thread for some good info.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=62279

Why are you waiting for to upgrade. Its cheap for the protection IMHO. Especially for wedding photogs.

[claudermilk]

Sounds cut-and-dried to me. They know they are doing wrong--you have a contract explicitly denying permission, they swiped the images from your gallery and removed the watermark (that's particularly damning).
While there may be some backlash, it seems fairly easy to explain your position, besides I'm not sure I would want anyone they know as a client.

[chuckinsocal]

I don't think there'll be any backlash or bad publicity from taking a strong action here. Any reasonable person who understood the circumstances would support your actions.

I might send the bride one more e-mail stating that if she doesn't respond and make this thing right within 5 days or so that you will take her to small claims court to recover your damages. Then, actually do it.

It also comes down to which message you want to send to the community: That it's ok to steal your stuff or it's not ok to steal your stuff.

Chuck Cannova
http://chuckinsocal.SmugMug.com

[aj986s]

If you do decide to pursue legal remedies, I suggest you do your own screen captures of the MySpace screens, before the evidence has disappeared....:huh

[JDub]

Hello everyone, thanks for the replies. Here is a quick update..

I did a screen capture and I have evidence of the posted pictures STILL there as of today. I also sent them a bill for $1300 (which is enforcable by a credit collection agency) as well as a letter from an attorney that states the violation. So we will see what happens now. I have also deactivated their online proof gallery, permanently or until I either get money, or have proof the images are down (and thats one of the things I emailed them about) - still no return email.

I am very surprised they could get the watermarks off. I cant even do it on the same pictures!

At least this is an open shut case. Which is always good. And true, I wouldnt want any of their friends as clients!!

[Markjay]

The gallery I visited on your website:
http://westbrookphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/3751164_EfEUh/1/266973680_WnXw2#266973535


has NO image protection whatsoever. I can right click and save any image in that gallery, quickly and eaily.

I'm not sure what protections smugmug offers on "non pro accounts" but, I'm a pro user and I have right click disabled through my Smugmug control panel. If you DO try to save an image from my gallery, you'll save nothing but a spacer image. IF you try to screen shot an image of mine, there is a prominent but, tasteful watermark on the images. On some it's right through the middle of the image, on others it's off to bottom right. There are only a handful of images on my site where one could get a clean screenshot and crop the image AND remove the watermark to use the image. But really, I don't think it's all that useful to crop an already small image, then remove the watermark on the image... and it's not even a printable size or resolution.

Additionally: IF you are shooting weddings, don't you get a deposit on the work BEFORE performing it? I didn't see any mention of this (but I might have overlooked it) in your original post.

In your agreement / contracts I would prominently place a clause that states that any violation of copyright / copying / downloading images without having purchased the right to do so, will result in a forfeiture of all deposits and further termination of services after that. Not exactly what you should write but, something of similar nature to discourage this kind of activity from even being a fleeting thought.

Good luck and I sincerely hope you find a way to teach them a lesson that your work has a value to it.... it's not free!





Hello everyone, thanks for the replies. Here is a quick update..

I did a screen capture and I have evidence of the posted pictures STILL there as of today. I also sent them a bill for $1300 (which is enforcable by a credit collection agency) as well as a letter from an attorney that states the violation. So we will see what happens now. I have also deactivated their online proof gallery, permanently or until I either get money, or have proof the images are down (and thats one of the things I emailed them about) - still no return email.

I am very surprised they could get the watermarks off. I cant even do it on the same pictures!

At least this is an open shut case. Which is always good. And true, I wouldnt want any of their friends as clients!!

[Scott Crouse]

Don't rely on e-mail, to easy to say "well I never go it" or "my spam filter must have filtered it". Send a registered letter and make them sign for it.

[JDub]

Registered letter will be sent tomorrow, thanks for the tip. Man, you can learn a lot here!!

Update - and I quote "you will not get a fu**ing dime out of me for posting those pictures to my space!!" and hung up on me. Hmmm, looks like I am about to be rich!

[ShepsMom]

Ouch! Sounds like a nasty little thang, doesn't she? :huh
Makes you work even harder!

Best of luck, i'll keep my eye on this thread to see how you make out. Hope you get what you deserve and hope she gets what she deserves as well. :deal

[Scott Crouse]

Oh my, that was quite the response. Sounds like the gautlet has been laid down, you now have her answer. I think you know the next step to take.

[claudermilk]

Laid down? I think more like hucked at him. My internal translator turned that into "I'm a jerk, please sue me" Go get her!

[Moogle Pepper]

Registered letter will be sent tomorrow, thanks for the tip. Man, you can learn a lot here!!

Update - and I quote "you will not get a fu**ing dime out of me for posting those pictures to my space!!" and hung up on me. Hmmm, looks like I am about to be rich!

them are fighting words!

[saurora]

This type of thing seems to be getting more and more common! Good for you....go get her! Out of curiosity, what percentage of payment has she given you? I don't know what the best way of preventing this is, but unless they have paid a sizeable portion of their fee up front, I wouldn't be posting any very 'sizeable' on-line image galleries for them to view, ie...keep the images small, unprocessed and heavily water-marked. Good for MySpace for taking them down. Keep hounding them to take down the rest. If she keeps it up, maybe they will ban her.

[MichaelKirk]

.....any chance they purchased the print photos and instead scanned them to put on their myspace account and did not screen print from your site and remove the watermarks??

Just a question. Maybe you addressed it already and I just missed it.

Michael

[JDub]

TO answer some questions. I get all payment 2 weeks before the wedding. She was paid in full. I tried to do half before and half after and got screwed, so that went out the window waaaaay back when I started in 1996.

The other question, they did not purchase any prints. And they wont now, since the online gallery has been deleted permanently.

Thanks guys for your support. This kind of stuff is way too common these days. Maybe a no proofing option should be the norm from now on. Have them come back to the studio the traditional way, get shown the proofs on a TV, whatever, and order right there. If they dont want any reprints, then do like Olan Mills, Target, etc, "we will destroy them if you don't order today" or something similar, maybe less dramatic.

Damn this is so frustrating. I feel like ripping my hair out, even though I am bald!

[Tee Why]

I was reading in PopPhoto that watermarks are very easy to remove.
I won't state how it's done though and I hear one pro landscape shooter doesn't even use them b/c they are so easily removed.

[i_worship_the_King]

So it sounds to me that we all need a better watermarking method...

Just sitting here thinking, I may try something like a micro print (for a check) and just print small text all over the thing, making it not worth their trouble to remove the markings while still making the photo relatively clear.

Either way, this sounds like an open & shut case. I hope your judge or arbitrator nail this up quickly.

Something like : http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee292/i_worship_the_king/test_micro.jpg

[JDub]

Thanks, the judge should end this relatively quick. Open shut, you are right.

True, we need a better watermkaring method. I have a new one in place now on the portfolio galleries on my website. They seem to be unobtrusive and hopefully they will work. I am kinda in overkill right now though, because of this, but maybe this will deter some deja vu in the future. Still considering the whole "no online proofing" thing, but we will see.

[gman33]

I have a question for you and sorry if I missed it but how did you know they were on her MySpace page?

I recently just went to a local sports team's website that I shot last year and noticed my pictures (2) that were on their new site and they were pictures that were not purchased. It appears that they copied the thumbnails and enlarged them a little.

I am planning on mentioning this to them at the next board meeting but will also offer a couple of better pictures for the site...I made a lot of money from them last year and don't want to ruin the deal

Good luck..watching this thread

[Mulder32]

I'm fairly new to the online stuff considering I'm getting back into photography in just the last year or so. I was a film guy in the '90s, so all this mention of stealing photos and watermarks not working is a bit frightening. Right now I don't even have watermarks on any of my pics on my website, just right-click protected. Now I read that watermarks are not even effective, so we shouldn't use them? AHHH!

[Raphy]

I really want to see how this play out. :lurk

GOod for you for going after them ! :thumb

[RogersDA]

INow I read that watermarks are not even effective, so we shouldn't use them? AHHH!Watermarking is as effective as --you-- want it to be. Big, bold, in-your-face watermarks are hard (though not entirely impossible) to remove the right skills and the right software. Smaller, in the lower corner marks are easily cropped by amatuers and pros alike. However, they are only getting 72dpi images (unless you've enabled original access). Not exactly the kind of resolution needed for large, quality pics.

You can, in my opinion, never go wrong by including a watermark of some sort. And I am not talking about a smaller,signature-only-type mark in the lower corner. Some form of watermark is a good deterent to some people. However, in the digitial age you can never foil them all. Put it online and it's free game for all.

[JDub]

I knew they were on her myspace page because when we first met at the client meeting/booking she mentioned she is on myspace, and that she liked my myspace site for my business (targeting high school senior sessions). I went to her site, for fun, and what do you know, there were my images!!

I have since, axed the entire FREE online gallery thing. What I do now, is have them come back to the studio for a viewing. Take the print order. THEN I will give them a free online gallery only for 1 year. If they want an extension its 30 bucks a year. Everything is now heavily watermarked, and extremely low resolution. You can check out my portfolio pages on my website to get an idea of how we do it now.

To update everyone on the situation:
-myspace deleted her account
-myspace also deleted her sisters account which had the same images
-we went to court, we won in an open-shut case
-I was awarded financial damages, and they now have a record, both of them
-her online gallery was completely deleted, per the judge
-I also filed a public report for anyone wondering what happened/future brides she might talk to and try to make me a bad guy, per the judge

Thanks everyone for following this, and for the great tips.

Lesson - enforce the contract!
Bigger Lesson - no more free online galleries until they buy a print at the viewing
Huge Lesson - always watermark!

[RogersDA]

I knew they were on her myspace page because when we first met at the client meeting/booking she mentioned she is on myspace, and that she liked my myspace site for my business (targeting high school senior sessions). I went to her site, for fun, and what do you know, there were my images!!

I have since, axed the entire FREE online gallery thing. What I do now, is have them come back to the studio for a viewing. Take the print order. THEN I will give them a free online gallery only for 1 year. If they want an extension its 30 bucks a year. Everything is now heavily watermarked, and extremely low resolution. You can check out my portfolio pages on my website to get an idea of how we do it now.

To update everyone on the situation:
-myspace deleted her account
-myspace also deleted her daughters account which had the same images
-we went to court, we won in an open-shut case
-I was awarded 10K, and they now have a record, both of them
-her online gallery was completely deleted, per the judge
-I also filed a public report for anyone wondering what happened/future brides she might talk to and try to make me a bad guy, per the judge

Thanks everyone for following this, and for the great tips.

Lesson - enforce the contract!
Bigger Lesson - no more free online galleries until they buy a print at the viewing
Huge Lesson - always watermark!10K is great.


Out of curiousity, do you feel that they will actually pay? So many photogs get awards, but never collect.

[JDub]

They will or go to jail, lol

[SloYerRoll]

They will or go to jail, lolI'm very happy you went after them and won. But don't count that check until it's cashed. It's small claims court. People regularly don't pay penalties awarded in this court. I don't know jack about the legal system, but I do know ppl that have claims similar to your that were open/shut and they haven't seen a dime in years.

And from another perspective:
To be honest, I'd rather go to jail for a little bit than cough up 10K. I'm pretty sure there are many that feel the same way as I.

So stay on top of it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease:wink

[RogersDA]

So stay on top of it. The squeaky wheel gets the grease:winkJosh sounds pretty squeeky to me. :rofl

[chuckinsocal]

All I can say is WOW!!! HUGE outcome!

I love it when people who think they are immune from the consequences of their actions learn for a fact that they're really not.

Great work!!!

Chuck Cannova
www.customrideportraits.com

[darkdragon]

10K is great.


Out of curiousity, do you feel that they will actually pay? So many photogs get awards, but never collect.


I would guess they won't pay, just based off what I've read about the lady in this thread. There is another way to get out of paying a debt - declare bankrupsy. If her new husband already has a house and they already have cars, they'd probably think that was better than paying. Hopefully they will just start paying it though.

The money is great, but I think just go through it and winning the case is an even bigger deal...isn't it? It definately shows future clients that you aren't some 2bit opperation who will not fight back if taken advantage of. Not to mention you were able to stop her from using the image she stole from your site, and that was the main point - i think.

Anyway, glad to hear it worked out and the judge was fair about it. :thumb

[bham]

Congrats JDub.

Its said some people have to sued to act right.

[Icebear]

Just to clarify, I dont think there's a criminal "record" here. What there IS is a civil judgement. They would have a hell of a time refinancing a mortgage, selling or buying a house, or anything else involving a title search. Until that judgement is cleared, they're in fairly deep doo-doo.

If they've got a lick of sense, they'll try to get you to settle for some lesser amount. Thea't a judgement call on your part. The law is on your side, but it do move pretty slow if they choose to be stoopit about it.

[JDub]

Thanks everyone, its never fun to have to do this kind of stuff, and the potential (key word, potential) negative press is a little scary, but then again, I wouldn't want anyone she refers to me anyway, or talks to for that matter. I am just glad to be able to wash my hands of this, and hopefully be able to avoid this problem in the future. It is all a learning process. Since 1996 I have learned so much, and I chock this one up to another learning process to better my studio and business practices. I guess its a blessing in disguise to some degree. Although it was hard to see the blessing at the time.

They probably will file bankruptcy, or try something to get out of paying, and frankly I don't care about the money, its the purpose of the whole thing. Dont steal from photographers, who captured your day. After all, all you have after the wedding are the pictures - they should be sacred. But some people have to be sued to realize these things.

I hope they think twice before stealing anything ever again, photography related or not.

*turns water faucet on, puts hands under it, rubs them together, and sighs in relief*

[claudermilk]

Glad to hear it all worked out (been lurking following the course of events). I see so many threads along similar lines with lots of big talk & "I know a friend of a friend"--now there's finally a concrete case to point at where things ended up going right for the photographer. :thumb