# Photo Theft



## Peter Clausen (Jan 4, 2009)

Here's a link to a video on YouTube that is using many mantis photos from around the web (including some from my personal site). Maybe you'll find one of yours there too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbKY42hZ5s8&amp;NR=1

http://www.bugsincyberspace.com/mantids/ma...ongata5_web.jpg

Apparently his name is Joey and he's 14.

Here's another by the same person. I recognize some of these from Mantidforum:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3FutQnbfBk


----------



## idolomantis (Jan 4, 2009)

I reckon ALOT of them being stolen from here :angry:


----------



## Orin (Jan 4, 2009)

Where's solo? Doesn't that all fall under "fair use"?


----------



## Ian (Jan 4, 2009)

Fraid I'm gunna have to agree with Orin, looks more like fair use to me.

The kid is hardly profiting or using these to his benefit. Just a young kid, interested in mantids, having a bit of fun if you ask me.


----------



## idolomantis (Jan 4, 2009)

If i would make a video like that, i would atleast put this in my discription: All pictures belong to their rightful owners.


----------



## PhilinYuma (Jan 4, 2009)

Not just the pix, Peter! I think that I have heard the music before, too!


----------



## Peter Clausen (Jan 4, 2009)

I wonder if anything in those videos is actually his own material. I would be surprised if he wasn't a member here too. I'd be supportive of the video if it had a link to my website and Mantidforum (and all the other sources). Stuff like that is good for our hobby, but I've probably dedicated a calendar round-the-clock year of my life to taking photos and uploading them to the internet. I would never use anybody else's photos w/o permission.

I'm fairly sure Orin was being sarcastic, Ian  We don't generally allow people to post photos taken by others here on the forum without permission from the source.

Whether it would fall under fair use or not (and I don't think so), it's just bad manners.


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 4, 2009)

Thanks for the "heads up," Peter. I've had photos and graphics "stolen" (not mantis related) before, and it's disheartening and angers me.

Many people just don't know about copyright issues as it pertains to pics on the Web. They see an interesting photo/graphic and think it's OK to use... as it's "on the Web." With so many graphics being uploaded to the Net, the anonymous nature of viewing and being able to use all that's out there, and no required lessons or standardized initiation to rules and or policies (even with small print copyright warnings or labels), it's not an issue that many users even recognize. Of course you also have the ones that do know, and don't care. There is no copyright police. And anything beyond getting the person to remove and stop using your pics/graphics is fruitless or more trouble than it's worth.

And it gets more complicated from there.... fair use, harmless use, not for profit, sharing information, don't know who the copyright owner is or how to contact them to ask for permission.... etc. So even if someone means no harm or tries to do the right thing, it's often not easy. Copying and pasting, and saving and uploading are infinitely much easier to grasp than sorting out the large grey area of Web copyright issues. But that doesn't mean it isn't aggravating when someone uses your stuff without asking! :angry: 

If anyone is interested in knowing more about Web copyright protection issues as they pertain to Web photos/graphics and how it affects YOU (and we ALL _should_ know something about it), here's a good explanatory link  :

What is Copyright Protection?


----------



## Peter Clausen (Jan 5, 2009)

Excellent link, Katnapper...thank you!


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 5, 2009)

You're welcome.  

Edit: PS... I'd previously been debating adding a copyright signature to my photos, but hadn't done it. I've decided I'll go ahead and will be doing it for future pics. It likely won't prevent anyone using them without permission, but at least I'll get a measure of credit if they don't alter or remove the signature.

PSS... Note: Most people are usually more than happy to let you use their photos if you just ask and give some sort of credit!


----------



## PhilinYuma (Jan 5, 2009)

Peter: Kat: Idolomantis:

I know in advance that I am going to wax prolix in presenting an alternative view to yours, so now may be a good time to practice your skim reading.

During my brief stint as an English Asst Professor, I watched for what was plagiarism in a student's paper and would have been copyright infringement if it had found its way onto the web. Every college student knows or should know that plagiarism is the theft of someone else's ideas, with the intention of deceiving the grader of the paper in question and obtaining an illicitly high grade, even though no financial gain is involved. When caught, it was rewarded with an F, though it could have been referred to the dean for disciplinary action.

The case in point, though, is that of a 14 year old boy who is bowled over by mantis images, real and imagined, and decides to share his delight by posting the pix on You Tube accompanied by music, which adds to the effect (at least for him and me!) but which was not written by him. It is worth noting that at least one pic on the the second URL carries a copyright notice! The result is a pleasant visual collage which would be unavailable to the vast majority of the public had he not created it, and which might just attract one or two folks, however briefly, to keep mantises and join the Forum.

Two main arguments are raised in opposition to this practice: first that it is bad manners, second that it is illegal.

Good or bad manners are premised on the shared expectations of a peer group. When I came to the US in the late fifties, not only did Americans say "please" and "thank you" with regularity, but also "you're welcome" or more enigmatically, "you bet," which to me and my English friends were somewhat outlandish because we didn't use them in England. Today in the US and England, "please" and "thank you" are almost extinct, and before we condemn such "bad manners" it is worth remembering that the good manners of days gone by, when a gentleman would always seat his female companion before seating himself and would always walk on the street side on the sidewalk and say "by your leave" or "allow me to introduce myself," are now perceived as quaint and outmoded. Any attempt at imposing one's own view of "good manners" on others tends to be frustrating and non-productive.

The legal issue is something else, and has little to do with what is morally right or wrong but rather what can be enforced by fiat, and by lawyers who decide what is "right" or 'wrong" according to who is paying them. Your excellent reference, Kat, gave an accessible insight into copyright law but did not, I think, give much advice on how to obtain a legal remedy for its infringement.

A decade or two back, American authors were complaining bitterly (and rightly, in my view) of copyright infringement by Chinese and Russian publishers. In the late 1890's, Kipling and others were complaining bitterly about the same infringements by American publishers. There is no doubt that a publisher like Thomas Mosher made his living from pirating English and French literary works, but he made many obscure (if you consider Pater's _Marius the Epicurean_ obscure) works available to the American public. In the same way, Peter, your pix, previously known only to an audience "select but few" has now delighted and perhaps inspired, hundreds of folks who would have never otherwise seen them, and that, surely, is a Good Thing.


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 5, 2009)

I do agree there can be many benefits to using and sharing pics, just as with information... even if permission wasn't granted first. My viewpoint on it is to be informed myself, and encourage others to be informed also... so they don't unknowingly tee someone off. If I did discover someone using my work, I wouldn't prosecute or try to get any legal relief (unless the person is making big money off my stuff, of course...  which has little chance of happening). My aim would be to ask the person to stop using it (if I found it objectionable) and/or educate them about kindly asking first next time. If I liked the way they were using it, and they were agreeable and cooperative in discussions, I'm sure I'd let them continue using it... with or without giving credit at my discretion.


----------



## Peter Clausen (Jan 5, 2009)

In my 6:32 PM post I said it was probably good for our hobby, so I think we agree there.

I do disagree that his video is otherwise unavailable. YouTube is inundated with similar videos showcasing mantises (I've uploaded several). In most cases these are original content provided by the source directly.

on manners:

I believe showing gratitude towards others is an effective way to accomplish any selfish agenda. Our entire society is based on this golden rule where we treat each other with respect with the expectation that it will be for the greater good of all. As an individual I give up certain natural rights like killing people that steal for me. Society rewards this sacrifice by punishing the perpetrator while giving me back my stuff. In this way the crime is resolved to the satisfaction of the majority instead escalating into battle after battle.

I'm not sure what the purpose of his video was. I suspect it was just a passion to share the subject, as you suggest. It may very well have been an assignment for school for all I know. Regardless, _I'm_ compelled to fail him (and probably support him by sharing a photo or two, were he to make a subsequent attempt to do it the "right" way).

Society encourages 14 year old boys to give credit to original works that they might use. Is it fair to the 12 year old boys that create videos and give credit to their sources or ask permission while Joey here is allowed to indiscriminately take the best of the best w/o permission? I helped my 2nd grade daughter out with her first report this year. Included in the assignment were instructions to cite her sources. My son, who had a different second grade teacher last year did a report on macaws and was required to obtain info. from three cited sources. This is what our society expects of 7 and 8 year old children.

Society also encourages me to report the general misuse of original works that I come across to their owners. This is partly why I posted the topic. And society encourages people like yourself to present different perspectives on the rules (thanks Phil). I think we all share these expectations. I also feel there is no real harm done here, but it is my duty to share my findings with the members of the community here that may be less tolerant of the unpermitted use of their original works.


----------



## The_Asa (Jan 5, 2009)

I agree that it is absolutely necessary to cite sources. What is learned in school should apply elsewhere as well. Although if you really don't want your pictures taken it is a good idea to use a watermark. Maybe someone could contact Joey? I imagine he could very well be completely ignorant of the illegality/immaturity of his actions.


----------



## Peter Clausen (Jan 6, 2009)

I don't doubt that Joey would be totally cool about the entire thing, and as I said before it wouldn't suprise me if he was a member here at one time or another.

I've considered the watermarking thing, but it already takes a ton of time to get the mantis, grow the mantis, take 10 photos, compare all 10 to choose the best one, crop it, sharpen it, resize it again, drop it into the website software and often make a new page for it, link it to other relevant pages on the site and then upload it to the main site. You save time by doing a bunch of photos during each step of the process. I still take thousands of photos each year, but I just don't have the time to devote about half an hour to each final photo like I used to (hence the number of lower quality images on my site and relatively few updates anymore). Of course, Bugs In Cyberspace is still growing in several different directions on a yearly basis. Most recently in terms of videos which I also upload to YouTube because it's SO much fun!

As for the watermarking detail, I figure the bottom disclaimer on almost every page of my website is pretty clear:

© 1997 - 2006 Bugs in Cyberspace All rights reserved.

This website is Best Viewed with IE 5+ or Netscape 6+ and in a resolution of 1024 X 768.

All pictures are original, and not to be copied without my permission, please. Thank you, and enjoy!

http://www.bugsincyberspace.com/creobroter_elongata.html


----------



## nasty bugger (Jan 7, 2009)

I think I would give Joey a email and tell him he should ask permission and post the link to your site, that would be informing him of the proper way to do things. I don't think very many 14 year olds think about how the law can affect them, or much of anything other than instant gratification, as that seems the norm even with adults nowadays.

Maybe explain the time you put into it, not just raising but the cropping and other production work, that he may think of as just fun and passing time.

I do believe he would be happy to post the link, maybe feel a bit helpful by doing so, if he knew it was alright.

I haven't looked at the video yet, but I'm on my way out the door, so maybe later, but I do remember a little bit about how carefree I was as a child. I lived in the middle of nowhere, and I didn't think much about copyrights and such, just living life B) Those were the daayyyyssss !


----------



## Krissim Klaw (Jan 8, 2009)

Peter said:


> I've considered the watermarking thing, but it already takes a ton of time to get the mantis, grow the mantis, take 10 photos, compare all 10 to choose the best one, crop it, sharpen it, resize it again, drop it into the website software and often make a new page for it, link it to other relevant pages on the site and then upload it to the main site.


No offense, but if your really worried about theft than you need to bite the bullet and spend the extra minute it takes to watermark pieces important to you. This isn't to say it will stop thefts, but it will make it so much easier to prove yes that is your picture, not to mention direct someone who sees the piece your way. A lot of people are now even popping in the url to their websites in the watermark to get some free advertisement for their sites should someone else be peddling their pictures around randomly. Also makes it easier for people to find you should they see one of pictures floating about and want to ask permission to use it, or commission you.With the ease of how information can be translated, art theft can be spotted anywhere if you look long enough. I'm sure just browsing these forums alone you could find people who are using artwork or photos for their avi's/signatures that is not their own. It is impossible to do anything about it though unless the person is profiting off of it.

As they say, if something is truly important enough to you that you don't want it stolen, than don't post it on the world wide web for all to see.


----------



## PhilinYuma (Jan 8, 2009)

Peter:

Krissim Klaw's entry in this thread brings up an issue that I had been careful to avoid in my earlier entry.

Your lucidly expressed claim is that "Joey" was in error in posting pix on the Internet to which you had the copyright. He is probably a good kid, you suggested, but should learn good manners and consult you before posting them

No problem there; I and almost everyone who contributed to the thread would agree with you. Unfortunately though, you titled the thread "Photo Theft," thereby implying that "Joey" is a thief or "common criminal" under the law. Krissim's answer, in which he also mentions the word "theft" means that your audience could make the same inference. He is not, of course. He fails to exhibit "criminal intent ("_mens rea_") in that he did not intend to, nor has he, permanently deprived you of your property. Therefore, by accusing him of a crime instead of a tort, you have arguably (and everything in law is arguable) libeled him.

What's that? You had no intention of libeling him? You were simply using "theft" rhetorically ("photo theft" packs much more of a punch than "Photo Copyright Violation")? You are not sure about the law in civil defamation? Joey could cop the same plea. After all, he knows that music, music videos, film clips and the like are regularly posted on You Tube, why not a few mantis pix (and in answer to all the talk about watermarking, the kid posted one pic complete with the copyright notice)?

Any legal remedy that either of you might seek would probably start and end with a "cease and desist" notice served on you both by your respective lawyers, and a retraction would probably be demanded of you, but you would both be subject to legal fees. Of course it will not come to that, but it is always worth remembering that moral argument, like showing gratitude is, as you pointed out, "an effective way to accomplish any selfish agenda."


----------



## The_Asa (Jan 8, 2009)

I'm 14 and I see no problem with simply asking someone for the permission to use their picture. It's not so much a matter of incapability as it is ignorance.


----------



## Peter Clausen (Jan 8, 2009)

I chose that particular title, if sensational, in a moment of REaction and to generally stir up some interest in a topic that might directly affect the original works of some members here. I'm less serious about personally persuing Joey than some of us are in defending their positions on the issue.

Still, I do not like to see my photos being used without permission. That is the extent of my personal stake in this issue. It is just a "feeling" that I've now, thanks to everyone's help, vented. Aside from that, as written previously, I had an obligation to get peoples' attention were their photos being used.

Just for fun, imagine if a member here were to assemble a website containing direct written bits and photos from posts on this forum. Perhaps he would it "Love of Mantises". Call it a guess or an implication, but any way you slice it people would be rightfully upset.

I did attempt to leave a message on Joey's video comments area which included a link to the original page of my website that contained the photo, but there was an error in posting that didn't allow even on a second attempt. I might get around to trying again, but more than likely I'll spend my time taking photos of my new mantises (for people to later use at their indiscretion). Because that is what I do love to do! As many of the hobby old-timers will attest, we're here because we love the hobby and you can count on us to be here tomorrow too!

I'm not saying I'm done posting in this particular topic. I just have nothing left to argue. I don't _really_ think of Joey as a criminal. I saw a lot of really great photos in his video that I'd not seen before (from various websites that he stole them from)  

Here's a recent example of the kind of requests I LIKE to receive:

From: XXXXXXX

Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 5:09 AM

To: [email protected]

Subject: Bugs in Cyberspace Inquiry

Hello. I work for XXXXXXXX, a publisher in Toronto. We are working on a school textbook about bugs and would like to obtain a vertical photo of a pink orchid mantis for use in our book. The book will be very large and we would need the photo to be hi-res and about 17” tall. Would you have anything available and, if so, what would your fee be?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you.

XXXXXXXX


----------



## Ian (Jan 9, 2009)

I'd be charging 4 figures for that if I were you Peter


----------



## PhilinYuma (Jan 9, 2009)

Ian said:


> I'd be charging 4 figures for that if I were you Peter


At _least_ four figures, Peter, but watch out for that Toronto publisher. He's notorious for signing his checks XXXXXXXX


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 9, 2009)

I'm curious... how much *are* photos worth (to organizations or folks such as have written you, Peter)? Does 4 figures mean like $19.95?


----------



## Ian (Jan 10, 2009)

PhilinYuma said:


> At _least_ four figures, Peter, but watch out for that Toronto publisher. He's notorious for signing his checks XXXXXXXX


So I've heard!!

Nah, I was referring to, sort of, $4,999 Katnapper.


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 10, 2009)

Ian said:


> So I've heard!!Nah, I was referring to, sort of, $4,999 Katnapper.


Egads!  Do photo rights really go for that much normally? :blink: 

Edit: Seriously, I have no ballpark idea.


----------



## The_Asa (Jan 10, 2009)

Katnapper said:


> Egads!  Do photo rights really go for that much normally? :blink: Edit: Seriously, I have no ballpark idea.


I believe he was making a joke  , No idea how much they are actually worth, but seeing as they are stolen so easily I doubt it's much.


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 10, 2009)

-Asa said:


> I believe he was making a joke  , No idea how much they are actually worth, but seeing as they are stolen so easily I doubt it's much.


Thanks, Asa.  I thought they might be making a joke about the 4 figures... but I really didn't know. And sometimes I admit I'm gullible enough to believe farfetched things if I don't know better.


----------



## Ian (Jan 11, 2009)

Haha - yea I was kidding Katnapper.

Not a huge amount I don't think. I'd say probably $20 or so was reasonable?

Never really sold photo before.


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 11, 2009)

Ian said:


> Haha - yea I was kidding Katnapper.Not a huge amount I don't think. I'd say probably $20 or so was reasonable?
> 
> Never really sold photo before.


Thanks for the clarification, Ian... :lol:


----------



## Emile.Wilson (Jan 18, 2009)

I bet the kid just made a image search on google and took all the ones that he thought were cool. I think he was just being a kid and being irrisponsible. At that age i doubt he would know about copyright

and manners. I think the good thing would be to send him a message explaining copyright and how this is theft, and in the future to ask kindly and respect other peoples rights.


----------



## Morpheus uk (Jan 19, 2009)

I remember ages ago i posted a screen shot of a movie on here and that got removed for copyright theft


----------



## nasty bugger (Jan 23, 2009)

I think in our trade magazine that the writers, members of the org, get $300 a page, but I could be mistaken on that amount. I would assume a good pic could get a couple hundred, but some folks would probably move on to find a lower price example, but those with the budget probably wouldn't flinch at $500, if the photo really worked for the article.


----------



## Emile.Wilson (Jan 26, 2009)

Katnapper said:


> Thanks for the "heads up," Peter. I've had photos and graphics "stolen" (not mantis related) before, and it's disheartening and angers me. Many people just don't know about copyright issues as it pertains to pics on the Web. They see an interesting photo/graphic and think it's OK to use... as it's "on the Web." With so many graphics being uploaded to the Net, the anonymous nature of viewing and being able to use all that's out there, and no required lessons or standardized initiation to rules and or policies (even with small print copyright warnings or labels), it's not an issue that many users even recognize. Of course you also have the ones that do know, and don't care. There is no copyright police. And anything beyond getting the person to remove and stop using your pics/graphics is fruitless or more trouble than it's worth.
> 
> And it gets more complicated from there.... fair use, harmless use, not for profit, sharing information, don't know who the copyright owner is or how to contact them to ask for permission.... etc. So even if someone means no harm or tries to do the right thing, it's often not easy. Copying and pasting, and saving and uploading are infinitely much easier to grasp than sorting out the large grey area of Web copyright issues. But that doesn't mean it isn't aggravating when someone uses your stuff without asking! :angry:
> 
> ...


Looks like the kid stole 1 of yours katnapper, the one of your ghost mantis before you made it in the avatar

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=E3FutQnbfBk&amp;...feature=related

At 0.17


----------



## Katnapper (Jan 27, 2009)

Emile said:


> Looks like the kid stole 1 of yours katnapper, the one of your ghost mantis before you made it in the avatar http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=E3FutQnbfBk&amp;...feature=related
> 
> At 0.17


Thanks for looking out for me, Emile... I appreciate it!  The P. paradoxa towards the beginning of his video looks similar, but is not my Superman. He got that pic from someone else!  Btw.... Superman molted to adult a couple of days ago, and I just took some more pics of him today. Hope to get them up on my blog soon.  I'm enjoying him all I can now, as I'll be sending him away for stud duties soon. B)


----------

