Vendor Stole My Photo

[BigD]

Just admit that at this point, you're just being a douche. Do the lawyer thing, go to court, prove me wrong.

I don't care, who agrees with you in this thread, but DTMFW owes you absolutely nothing, and I'm sure they've talked to their attorney the minute they got your letter and removed your picture off their site. Their lack of contact with you is the smartest thing they can do, until they get served with any legal papers. Their lack of participation in this thread is also a good sign, as I guarantee you, they've seen it, since it's been at the top of New Threads for a few days.

DTMFW should not have used random pics found online, and should use only images representing their actual product, but that's a whole other issue. As far as you're concerned, you're just an asshole who wouldn't let it go.

[PeaveyBassist]

Just admit that at this point, you're just being a douche. Do the lawyer thing, go to court, prove me wrong.

I don't care, who agrees with you in this thread, but DTMFW owes you absolutely nothing, and I'm sure they've talked to their attorney the minute they got your letter and removed your picture off their site. Their lack of contact with you is the smartest thing they can do, until they get served with any legal papers. Their lack of participation in this thread is also a good sign, as I guarantee you, they've seen it, since it's been at the top of New Threads for a few days.

DTMFW should not have used random pics found online, and should use only images representing their actual product, but that's a whole other issue. As far as you're concerned, you're just an asshole who wouldn't let it go.

QFT!!!1!!!1111!!

AFAIK the picture was only used as a category selection picture, not a picture in a description of a product they sell. Am I incorrect? To me, the picture representing the type of vehicle (e36) and not the body kit itself, wasn't used to describe a product they sell, and therefore not used for any kind of profit. Maybe I'm wrong? I do agree that taking the watermarks off might not have been the best thing to do though. Like everyone else has said, you told him to take the picture down and they immediately removed the photo from the website. Whats the big deal now?

[Massive Lee]

http://www.photosecrets.com/tips.copyright.html

[ck_taft325is]

I still don't see that he's seeking monetary compensation. And I'll say it AGAIN, a GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE is too contact the person who put their watermark on an image and ask if they can use it? Or if they fail to do that BASIC of good business practices, leave the fucking water mark and give the guy some fucking credit. Anyone that spouts fucking someone over by removing all credit to them by ANY business is a fucking twat. End of story.

Tired of hearing about, "Oh well you're a douche for doing what you should!!" - Shut your fucking whore mouths already. He notified the community about a shady business practice. Either say thanks, or fucking skip the thread.

Read up on photography on the internet, assclowns. It is illegal to take someone's photo withour permission, fail to grant them compensation for it OR even give them an idiom of respect by granting them credit for the photo.

Peavy, I wouldn't say there's much of any big deal beyond him defending himself from attacks on his character for doing exactly as he should. The fact that DTMFW didn't even make any form of contact is ludicrous and frankly, appaling.

[Fidhle007]

But it is not compensation that you are entitled to in the eyes of the law.

In a case like this, where it is indirectly being used to obtain profit (by means of advertising), you notify the offender with a cease and desist order, and they either stop or don't and then you go from there.

Eurostop took the image down when notified that it was in violation of copyright. That's the end of it. The OP is legally retarded and so are you for going along with it like his balls are made of gold.

I've dealt with similar things in the music industry so I know how the process goes. I'm not following Speedminded blindly, I simply feel for his situation as I've had similar experiences. Speedminded is entitled to the full extent of whatever the law will provide, pending the case is found in his favor which it most likely will be based on the evidence. Initially though, he contacted them and offered to let them use the photo for whatever he would normally charge any other commercial website for such services. This seems fair and the fact that they haven't even acknowledged his contact is just poor business practice.

"Oh shit, my bad, sorry we can't afford that we're a small company. It's down now and it won't happen again."

See there, was that really so hard? There's a certain level of frustration and emotion that gets involved when one's artwork is taken and to be able to rise over that and deal directly and professionally is key. Sadly Eurostop is not making that easy in this case...

In one of the situations I delt with in the past, a band I played in tried to release three pieces of mine without any sort of compensation after I had left the group, with the mutual understanding that I would be addressed as any other musician would instead of as a band member. Later, when they tried to release my work (I had done some studio work for them as well as composing) I flipped out and instead of initially taking the $5000 settlement they offered, pushed for the $15,000 I felt I was owed. This was a major band on a major label (I believe they spent well over $50k on the CD I was a part of) and I was upset that they were profiting from my work but in the end I ended up having to settle for even less because I mishandled my end.

In the case at hand I think Speedminded has done what he needs to do and is working professionally and Eurostop at least owes him the courtesy of an email and an apology. At this point I agree though, it should be left in the lawyers hands before more internet bullshit is stirred.

[Fidhle007]

I still don't see that he's seeking monetary compensation. And I'll say it AGAIN, a GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE is too contact the person who put their watermark on an image and ask if they can use it? Or if they fail to do that BASIC of good business practices, leave the fucking water mark and give the guy some fucking credit. Anyone that spouts fucking someone over by removing all credit to them by ANY business is a fucking twat. End of story.

Tired of hearing about, "Oh well you're a douche for doing what you should!!" - Shut your fucking whore mouths already. He notified the community about a shady business practice. Either say thanks, or fucking skip the thread.

Read up on photography on the internet, assclowns. It is illegal to take someone's photo withour permission, fail to grant them compensation for it OR even give them an idiom of respect by granting them credit for the photo.

Peavy, I wouldn't say there's much of any big deal beyond him defending himself from attacks on his character for doing exactly as he should. The fact that DTMFW didn't even make any form of contact is ludicrous and frankly, appaling.

Amen, brother.

[xwill112x]

i hope the judges laugh at this fucking idiotic case.

[Fidhle007]

i hope the judges laugh at this fucking idiotic case.

And I hope you hit a fucking wall. I seriously want to come steal your car and crash it just so I can use your logic on you.

[Iain]

As a journalist, I've come up against this in the past. Of course, our laws down here differ greatly to your laws over there, but here are the basic points as I see it:

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for A) using his image without permission and B) removing/altering the work without permission.

- Speedminded was well within his rights to ask for payment, and then a cease & desist when no payment was forthcoming.

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for spelling "works" "werkz"

- I wouldn't expect to be paid a cent by Captain Fibreglass as he's removed the content. It's not like he ran it in a magazine and its in print for the rest of eternity (as has happened to one of my stories).

Sorry to say, Speedminded, but I think you should let it go and move on to pimping your shots (even to Australian and New Zealand magazines and websites - Aussies have huge numbers of car mags down here!)

Aptyp is a retard.

Possibly the most honest thing written in this thread. Add xwill112x to that window-licking list, too.

[Fidhle007]

Iain, your avatar is awesome!

[speedminded]

But it is not compensation that you are entitled to in the eyes of the law.

In a case like this, where it is indirectly being used to obtain profit (by means of advertising), you notify the offender with a cease and desist order, and they either stop or don't and then you go from there.

Eurostop took the image down when notified that it was in violation of copyright. That's the end of it. The OP is legally retarded and so are you for going along with it like his balls are made of gold.

You are still stuck on the one and only TRADEMARK infringement case you are familiar with. This is not trademark infringement, it's copyright infringement. I am entitled 100% to compensatory damages.

I do own my own business, and I know there comes a time when the cost of legal council exceeds the cost of frying some small fish. I choose my legal battles wisely, and from what I've gathered I highly doubt this guy is really profiting from your silly photo.

Why would I care If he's profiting from it? I mentioned before I don't care if they don't sell a single "e36 m3 GTR bodykit" in the next 100 years. If they had contacted me regarding my photo and negotiated something then sure I would hope that everything I had to offer would promote them and their products in a positive way. That is not the case therefore I have zero sympathy for anyone with poor business ethics.

Couldn't agree more. Furthermore, the fact the the OP has failed to seek legal council, and then questioned whether or not I own a business is nothing short of a fucking joke.

He instead seeks legal advice on r3v and shows how shallow his pockets really are.

Moron!

Is your business insured?

Where do you find a single sentence of mine that might even begin to suggest I'm seeking any advice? Please quote it.

QFT!!!1!!!1111!!

AFAIK the picture was only used as a category selection picture, not a picture in a description of a product they sell. Am I incorrect? To me, the picture representing the type of vehicle (e36) and not the body kit itself, wasn't used to describe a product they sell, and therefore not used for any kind of profit. Maybe I'm wrong? I do agree that taking the watermarks off might not have been the best thing to do though. Like everyone else has said, you told him to take the picture down and they immediately removed the photo from the website. Whats the big deal now?

lolol! The content doesn't matter one bit. A business took my intellectual property and illegally used it on their commercial website. The photo could have been of a frog or a desert sunset and it wouldn't matter because I still own the rights to it and its up to me how I want it to be used. Removing the watermark is just an additional federal charge to the infringement.

[Aptyp]

As a journalist, I've come up against this in the past. Of course, our laws down here differ greatly to your laws over there, but here are the basic points as I see it:

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for A) using his image without permission and B) removing/altering the work without permission.

- Speedminded was well within his rights to ask for payment, and then a cease & desist when no payment was forthcoming.

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for spelling "works" "werkz"

- I wouldn't expect to be paid a cent by Captain Fibreglass as he's removed the content. It's not like he ran it in a magazine and its in print for the rest of eternity (as has happened to one of my stories).

Sorry to say, Speedminded, but I think you should let it go and move on to pimping your shots (even to Australian and New Zealand magazines and websites - Aussies have huge numbers of car mags down here!)

Only amazing that you typed up exactly what I've been saying and then called me a retard... Maybe you're the retard.

[Fidhle007]

Only amazing that you typed up exactly what I've been saying and then called me a retard... Maybe you're the retard.

You might have similar points of view but he put his out there in a supportive manner and didn't refer to Speedminded as a Douche. The guy had his photo stolen and the company won't talk to him about, how well do you think name calling is really going to work? Hence, why you are a retard.

[speedminded]

http://copybyte.com/copyright/infringement/4L/digital-copyright/frequently-asked-questions.htm

What should I do if I have been accused of internet copyright infringement?

The first thing you should do is make every effort to remove the copied materials from the web. Next, if it is possible, you should communicate with the person or organization whose materials you copied (or their representative) in order to come to understand their expectations. If you are unable to come to an agreement, you should seek legal advice because the copyright owner may pursue legal action.

[e30e]

As a journalist, I've come up against this in the past. Of course, our laws down here differ greatly to your laws over there, but here are the basic points as I see it:

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for A) using his image without permission and B) removing/altering the work without permission.

- Speedminded was well within his rights to ask for payment, and then a cease & desist when no payment was forthcoming.

- DTM Fiber Werkz are douches for spelling "works" "werkz"

- I wouldn't expect to be paid a cent by Captain Fibreglass as he's removed the content. It's not like he ran it in a magazine and its in print for the rest of eternity (as has happened to one of my stories).

Sorry to say, Speedminded, but I think you should let it go and move on to pimping your shots (even to Australian and New Zealand magazines and websites - Aussies have huge numbers of car mags down here!)



Possibly the most honest thing written in this thread. Add xwill112x to that window-licking list, too.

x2!

I swear just because you disagree with OP does not mean you have to be a compete asshat like 3-4 of you have been. If anything this twat of fiberglass company that overcharges for shit work should at least make a public apology so the OP will stop posting and end this thread.