P O T T S wrote:

Then just ban their ip's from yoru site.

This is technically impossible.  Websites register the visitors' IPs, not Pinterest's IP.  Therefore Pinterest cannot be banned.

David Parsons wrote:

Okay, lets get this out of the way.  Copyright infringement is not theft.  No one has deprived you of your files.  They have made unauthorized copies.  Theft means that you no longer have your files.  Infringement is illegal, but it is not theft.

The pirate's excuse.

Bullshit. When you infringe on my copyright, you are stealing from me. You are taking my property without my permission.

Someone who infringes on copyright, copies software or music or videos or photographs or the written word without permission (with specific legal exceptions) is a thief. Don't sugar coat it and pretend otherwise.

DA PHOTO wrote:
Can some explain to me about the data being stripped.

I have a pinterest page so far the few  re pinns that i see have a link to my website
and my name including copyright.

Check the metadata of the images.

A R M wrote:

Read again my posts. I specifically made a distinction between having something taken against your will and not protecting your valuables properly because of naivety.

Listen very carefully.

Your opinion on what is naive has NOTHING to do with illegal actions (which copyright infringement is). I can fail to protect my property and it makes NO LEGAL DIFFERENCE. Theft is theft.

A R M wrote:
That will not happen anytime soon because a) In the information age IT professionals are in the highest demand and b) IT is not exactly a popular hobby.

The Indians and Filipinos are blowing you out of the water and you actually make this ridiculous claim?

291 wrote:
one, pinterest takes the images their users collect and places them on their servers while stripping the exif data. that is a violation of the law to remove copyright info.

if true, I'm surprised there isn't a class action lawsuit for some lawyer(s) to get rich from.

helleborine wrote:
Hi everyone,

I've got a law firm that is discussing whether to file against Pinterest.

According to them this is a clear case of abuse of the safe harbor provision.

DO NOT FILE DMCA take-down notices.  Leave the material on Pinterest and say nothing for now. Document everything of yours that is on Pinterest (url of the actual PIN).  I'd appreciate if you send me lists of these URLs.  I will forward this to the law firm.

Some of my images are being stolen and put up there. How do we reach you and can you please provide some additional information on the attorneys involved? Thanks!

Al Lock Photography wrote:
Listen very carefully.

Your opinion on what is naive has NOTHING to do with illegal actions (which copyright infringement is). I can fail to protect my property and it makes NO LEGAL DIFFERENCE. Theft is theft.

Read again my posts. I said it before: I DO NOT CARE IF THE LAW SAYS IT IS ILLEGAL, it no longer responds to the issues from our current reality. The whole concept of intellectual property has to change and evolve, the business model has to change, the law has to change. This for the benefit of everyone, photographers included. People with your mindset still want to make business with their images like they were cows and goats.

Al Lock Photography wrote:

The Indians and Filipinos are blowing you out of the water and you actually make this ridiculous claim?

I do not know how the reality is where you live or what do you think the reality is here. All I can say is that currently I am requested to work in not one, not two, not three, but FOUR different projects and I am not even a hotshot or elite material. I am just a guy who reduces incident rates and keeps the hardware going, nothing fancy. It just happens that this country has such a severe outage of engineers and that is not going to change for the rest of my productive life.

I have worked with some indian guys and they all are brilliant and have earned their knowledge. If I ever go unemployed because of them it will not be because of "theft", but because they were better than me. Simple.

These carrer comparisons are absurd, but amusing. It shows how oblivious some professional photographers seem to be. Or maybe it is just denial.

Shot By Adam wrote:
Hey, out of curiosity, why are organizations like PPA not going to bat for photographers on issues like this? You'd think they would be on the front lines screaming about websites like this, right?

Not sure about PPA but I do recall some pretty heated stuff in the APA discussions and that they are definitely opposed to it and doing what they can to defend IP rights.

A R M wrote:

Read again my posts. I said it before: I DO NOT CARE IF THE LAW SAYS IT IS ILLEGAL, it no longer responds to the issues from our current reality. The whole concept of intellectual property has to change and evolve, the business model has to change, the law has to change. This for the benefit of everyone, photographers included. People with your mindset still want to make business with their images like they were cows and goats.

So, you're defending theft.

Don't mind if we steal your IT work, do you?

Exactly what do you do? I'm sure that I can find someone who will be happy to steal your IP and make money off it and undercut you. Oh, and cut your income as a result.

Al Lock Photography wrote:

So, you're defending theft.

Don't mind if we steal your IT work, do you?

Exactly what do you do? I'm sure that I can find someone who will be happy to steal your IP and make money off it and undercut you. Oh, and cut your income as a result.

Ok, at this point you clearly are being obtuse. Call me when you decide to open your eyes.

helleborine wrote:
http://pinterest.com/source/yourwebsiteurl.com/

Replace "yourwebsiteurl.com" with your website's URL.

That's ONE way.  But you cannot catch everything in this manner, because sometimes, people pin from Google search, and the pin is attributed to Google, not your website.

Attribution is lost upon re-pinning, something else that makes detection of your content elusive.

Another way is to Google "pinterest WIDGETS" if your website has clearly identifiable WIDGET content.  If you have a variety of subjects, and people pin them on generic boards not called WIDGETS but say, "things I love" - then you'll never find your content.

It's very difficult to track your content.

Very interesting. I found a dozen pictures. At least the pictures still have the logo with website url on it.

Edit: It looks like there is a link to the original page? As long as there's a link, I don't have a problem. There is the potential to drive traffic, plus it should help with Google link popularity, or whatever it is called.

http://www.lagunabeachbikini.com/index. … togallery/

A R M wrote:
Read again my posts. I said it before: I DO NOT CARE IF THE LAW SAYS IT IS ILLEGAL, it no longer responds to the issues from our current reality. The whole concept of intellectual property has to change and evolve, the business model has to change, the law has to change. This for the benefit of everyone, photographers included. People with your mindset still want to make business with their images like they were cows and goats.

actually the concept is alive, well, thriving and stronger than ever.  as it should be.  take a moment and look around at other "intangible" intellectual properties such as software, music, film by such organizations like apple, sony and disney in how their policies travel much further than the pastures of just cows and goats.

the issue is only hard to fathom if it's not understood.  that becomes a "you" problem, not the problem of the system.

Amazing Productions wrote:
Edit: It looks like there is a link to the original page? As long as there's a link, I don't have a problem. There is the potential to drive traffic, plus it should help with Google link popularity, or whatever it is called.

Link popularity:  Pinterest uses the "nofollow" directive, therefore you derive no link popularity from Google or other search engines from any of these links.

Traffic: Check your web logs.  I have not received a single visitor from Pinterest.  Your experience may be different.

Mark Laubenheimer wrote:
how is something linked for non-distribution?

For examples...a site like Facebook or Pinterest, they're all-about the re-posting. Re-pinning, "share"ing, etc. on sites where a photographer showcases their work to simply showcase it, and not share it all literally and physically (lie MM, MI, omp, etc) these sites aren't designed to distribute images found on it without written consent. Even lists, are linked to one of the involve3d-talent's portfolios, credits given or not. And we cannot "re-list" a listed image.

IMHO alone, as always;

~Danny
http://www.dbiphotography.com/

P O T T S wrote:

This is where we will disagree. There is NO difference. Theft of IP is theft of IP. If I steal your car for personal use, that is fine. It is only if I resell it that it becomes wrong?

Why is it ok for someone to rip a copy of music and put it online for everyone to take? I can answer that. It isnt. If a band freely puts music out there and tells everyone to share, that is different.

Bands put samplers online for people to freely steal and use, based on it gaining them exposure. A car is a physical object, and can't really be enjoyed by simple viewing like a photograph can. If you'd like to be morality police, all theft is wrong. Cool. I'd rather sleep well at night, and just don't post anything I'm worried about anyone stealing and mangling. I'd rather just police me, than waste time and effort trying to police you & everyone else with a broadband connection  

My opinions aren't about right or wrong, like the letter of the law, It's about an approach so I don't turn into Anal Andy the Weirdo Worry-wort

IMHO alone, as always;

~Danny
http://www.dbiphotography.com/

DBIphotography Toronto wrote:

Bands put samplers online for people to freely steal and use, based on it gaining them exposure. A car is a physical object, and can't really be enjoyed by simple viewing like a photograph can. If you'd like to be morality police, all theft is wrong. Cool. I'd rather sleep well at night, and just don't post anything I'm worried about anyone stealing and mangling. I'd rather just police me, than waste time and effort trying to police you & everyone else with a broadband connection  

My opinions aren't about right or wrong, like the letter of the law, It's about an approach so I don't turn into Anal Andy the Weirdo Worry-wort

IMHO alone, as always;

~Danny
http://www.dbiphotography.com/

Bands putting out samplers is a huge difference than file sharing sites that encourage the distribution of copyrighted material - like Napster did and got shut down. I see the same ahead for pintrest.

P O T T S wrote:

Bands putting out samplers is a huge difference than file sharing sites that encourage the distribution of copyrighted material - like Napster did and got shut down. I see the same ahead for pintrest.

Me too. I can't stand the thought of it; the idea behind how it works! Nightmare of a site!

~D

Shot By Adam wrote:
Hey, out of curiosity, why are organizations like PPA not going to bat for photographers on issues like this? You'd think they would be on the front lines screaming about websites like this, right?

Eh....ASMP also talked with the folks at Pinterest and they "worked" with ASMP to make it more Photographer "friendly" but I call BS.

Besides ASMP is dickless as of late. (opinion)

291 wrote:
if protecting copyright infringement is important click the link, scroll down and send a note to email member support:  http://www.ppa.com/

if protecting copyright infringement is not important then disregard, but those taking a stand will take care of their own, including you.

hammer the ppa, they need to earn their protective status and this is part of their charter.

i have received reply.  they are on it.  to help ensure the response wasn't just lip service, please drop them a note per the link in the above in quote. 

i suggest mentioning if they won't fight for photographer intellectual property rights rights, who will?  as such, a fight through releases to major news outlets defines their organization which should also be included as a gentle reminder.

A R M wrote:

Ok, at this point you clearly are being obtuse. Call me when you decide to open your eyes.

I think you are the one that needs to open your eyes. Your moral base? Sucks.

291 wrote:
if protecting copyright infringement is important click the link, scroll down and send a note to email member support:  http://www.ppa.com/

if protecting copyright infringement is not important then disregard, but those taking a stand will take care of their own, including you.

hammer the ppa, they need to earn their protective status and this is part of their charter.

Thanks for this. I'm also going to continue to bug ASMP about it. The current arrangement is not acceptible.

Al Lock Photography wrote:
Not with something on Pinterest. They stripped the data. They don't show up. And you'd know that if you had read the whole thread.

I meant doing an image search. Like if you heard the name of a really cool photographer, you could google it to see their really cool photos? And if you saw a really cool photo, you could google it to find the really cool photographer who shot it? You know, googling?

No wonder you guys think this is the end of the world. Don't yall know how to google stuff??!?!? Not trying to be insulting, but I think you are being shortsighted in missing an opportunity to market yourself further... and also a little silly if you think you can stop internet pirating. Posting something on the internet is like that movie scene where the kids dump a huge box of fliers for their party down the stairwell at school and all the kids on the stairs grab copies. That's what the internet is. The only way to stop it is to not use the internet at all.

V Laroche wrote:

I meant doing an image search. Like if you heard the name of a really cool photographer, you could google it to see their really cool photos? And if you saw a really cool photo, you could google it to find the really cool photographer who shot it? You know, googling?

No wonder you guys think this is the end of the world. Don't yall know how to google stuff??!?!? Not trying to be insulting, but I think you are being shortsighted in missing an opportunity to market yourself further... and also a little silly if you think you can stop internet pirating. Posting something on the internet is like that movie scene where the kids dump a huge box of fliers for their party down the stairwell at school and all the kids on the stairs grab copies. That's what the internet is. The only way to stop it is to not use the internet at all.

You don't actually understand how Google works, do you?

And I see you are another one who defends theft and piracy.

Let me guess, you have a hard drive full of illegal movies and mp3s....

Al Lock Photography wrote:
And I see you are another one who defends theft and piracy.

That isn't what she said.   You can read whatever you want into it, but the seriousness of this thread has turned petty as of late, partially due to comments like this.

GCobb Photography wrote:
That isn't what she said.   You can read whatever you want into it, but the seriousness of this thread has turned petty as of late, partially due to comments like this.

You can google images that show up on Pinterest to your heart's content. I've tried it. TinEye too. They don't show up. The stripping of all metadata (and my guess that Pinterest doesn't allow the images to be indexed) means that there is no search criteria working.

So it isn't a marketing tool at all. It's just plain theft.

If you are a copyright holder who allows your work to be pinned, that is up to you. The problem with Pinterest is that they encourage people to pin content without the copyright holder's permission or knowledge, and then copy the images whole to their servers (do not link) and strip the metadata from the images, effectively making it difficult to impossible to track down the piracy. And also meaning that the chance of it generating business or interest in the photographer's work is close to nil.

Neil Snape wrote:
Really, anyone that posts there should know that it's a portal for blasting images everywhere.

I won't, go there, I already have pictures here and on FB.

I will say that knowingly posting to Pinterest, you are allowing and encouraging inappropriate use of your images.

That be your choice>

Can't I pin your images? It links right back to your web!

x

Natalia_Taffarel wrote:

Can't I pin your images? It links right back to your web!

x

Exactly. Pinterest isn't like posting an image : it's posting a link to an image. Very different. It always link back to the source. Very different from someone posting your pics on facebook or twitter, etc. Of course, it's a graphic link, but would you sue Google for showing your images in their image search engine ? I didn't think so...

Quentin Gaudilliere wrote:

Exactly. Pinterest isn't like posting an image : it's posting a link to an image. Very different. It always link back to the source. Very different from someone posting your pics on facebook or twitter, etc. Of course, it's a graphic link, but would you sue Google for showing your images in their image search engine ? I didn't think so...

Actually, no it's not. That's one of the issues and potential legal problems Pinterest has. IT DOES NOT link, it downloads the image onto its servers and posts from there. It is NOT like Google (which does link and only hosts thumbs).