simonk has the right approach, maybe ( and it does sound unlikely) they don’t know the rules?

andywhit – Member

>I think the answer is with the exif info and serial number of the camera. Then it comes down to the judges opinion.

Indeed, but obviously you could use software to add the serial number of your camera to any old image.

</devil’s advocate>

In a nutshell we have the whole problem, je je je!

I was going to say that plenty of sites use auto-harvest/display of any photos you put on flickr simply by parsing search results so I presume these are images that are either a) marked as private or b) being specifically noted as being “their own”?

A few more details might help here.

Have they actually got hold of the full size originals from Flickr? If so then set your flickr settings to limit the maximum size that your images can be viewed at or only upload smaller versions of the images to start with.

Presumably they are subscribed to your flickr stream, which is how they get the images as soon as you upload them.

coffeeking – Member

I was going to say that plenty of sites use auto-harvest/display of any photos you put on flickr simply by parsing search results so I presume these are images that are either a) marked as private or b) being specifically noted as being “their own”?

I don’t understand!!

I know flickr has a feature for dislpaying photos and embedding script in web pages, but as with all flickr stuff the is clear branding on display, these are being taken and included in a website to appear as if the are part of the site in an effort to make the site look more appealing.
The photos are public and I don’t think there is any question that copyright has been breached, just a question of demonstating who the photographer is.

Thats what I meant with b) – they’re being used as their own rather than the script harvesting them. Was just saying it to point out that the scripts do exist and dont have particularly obvious flickr branding (at least not the ones I’ve seen).

Indeed RD most people are unaware they are breaking the law and are quite happy and very apologetic i am either lucky or crap so it has only happened once to me and worked out fine.

know flickr has a feature for dislpaying photos and embedding script in web pages, but as with all flickr stuff the is clear branding on display, these are being taken and included in a website to appear as if the are part of the site in an effort to make the site look more appealing.

right click – save as – upload to your own site photo’s for web use dont need to be massive files.

Coffeeking i know that one of the biggest image libaries (sorry i cant recall wich one been away from it all for a few years now) is doing this already 🙁
Hope you do get payed or at least the credit you deserve for your work 🙂

Simon.

I could be mistaken, but isn’t there a notification of when the EXIF data was last modified? If it’s unmodified, that might help your case…

Also, this is bang out of order, and as illegal in Spain as it is in the UK. I’d send a strongly worded follow up (via your lawyer if finances permit) explaining that you’d like £20 per pic shown on the site – even include an invoice. It’s theft, pure and simple.

I see my pics all the time, being used as FB profile pics and so on. Like you, I have no problem with this, but 700 pics and a false claim to a relationship with you is almost unbelieveable.

However, if you put pics online, this is one of the inevitable consequences – watermarking any future uploads is the only way of ensuring that you get credited – or at least of putting people off downloading them.

have they saved the pictures, or are they linking to them on flickr (like we do in the forum)?

Reason i ask is, could you just upload some photoshopped pictures of the shop staff getting friendly with goats (for example) as replacements?

could make an entertaing few minutes while they take the site down 😛

So who is it then, Simon: Karacol, Bicimania, Mammoth?

Pass 🙁 sorry was about 2 years ago now and i have slept since then 😛 was on the EPUK forums thats all i recall.

if they use your name and imply that you are a friend of the shop when they use the images, does they way they do that not make it fairly clear that they’re your photos in the first place? or have i misunderstood?

This may be why the only way you can link photos from fotopic is by going in to your profile to get them.

I could be mistaken, but isn’t there a notification of when the EXIF data was last modified?

no, and if there were it could also be falsified

This thread is useless with out pix 😉

Always upload small images say 799pix at 75% compression.

and if you really don’t want it out there… DONT POST IT 🙂

Also, this is bang out of order, and as illegal in Spain as it is in the UK. I’d send a strongly worded follow up (via your lawyer if finances permit) explaining that you’d like £20 per pic shown on the site – even include an invoice. It’s theft, pure and simple.

Not necessarily so, it depends on how the judge reads the situation. Charging and claiming compensation is my issue.

thisisnotaspoon – Member

have they saved the pictures, or are they linking to them on flickr (like we do in the forum)?

They are linking directly, but I don’t know if they have copies saved for future use, I had thought about uploading some porn, but it is flickr and I don’t think they’d approve. 😕

mogrim – Member

So who is it then, Simon: Karacol, Bicimania, Mammoth?

¡Que malo eres!! They all have permission to use any pictures and they know how to link. I have a good relationship with most of the shops in Madrid. These cabrones are from further afield.

theflatboy – Member

if they use your name and imply that you are a friend of the shop when they use the images, does they way they do that not make it fairly clear that they’re your photos in the first place? or have i misunderstood?

Basically no. If the BNP use your pictures and your name in a friendly way, does that make it OK? Any user must have permisssion, fundamental copyright law. 😉

i’m not saying they have the right to use them, i’m saying you have the proof that they’re yours!

These cabrones are from further afield

If it’s Morenito give us a shout, I know them all and could go chat…

mogrim – Member

These cabrones are from further afield

If it’s Morenito give us a shout, I know them all and could go chat…
I know some of the Morenito team, it’s not them. I can’t say who it is for obvious reasons.

How’s life with you?
Are you coming to Madrid for the XC World Cup at the end of the month?

theflatboy – Member

i’m not saying they have the right to use them, i’m saying you have the proof that they’re yours!

You’re right but it might not be enough for the judge, crazy isn’t it??

It could be that they have made a flickr ‘badge’. It allows you to make a script to link to peoples photos on flickr automatically. It allows you to do it for your own photos (i.e. if you were creating your own web page) or you can use it to search for particular tags in publicly viewable images or to link to groups. You cant use it to see a particular user though.

Go to: http://www.flickr.com/badge.gne to test it – see if you can make a badge that displays one of your contacts photos for example.

Once you have a basic badge, it is possible (particularly with the html version rather than the flash version) to modify the code to strip out any flickr branding etc.

I think the key is that you can make a badge to any image that is publically VIEWABLE. I dont know if the flickr badge generator will therefore ignore any copyright options you have checked and therefore this could provide an avenue for the bike shop to link to your photos.

To see if it is a flickr badge, look at the source code of the web page if you can (right-click and view source). There should be something somewhere with a comment inserted saying its a flickr badge. Or you could remove the tags from a recent photo and see if it also disappears from their site. Or, if all your photos are also added to a particular group, then this person may be making a badge from images in that group… so remove them from that group…

Just an idea – but worth a try.