divewizard
perspicaz
After discovering my copyrighted images being used without my permission a few weeks ago I began sanding DMCA takedown notices for my images I discovered being used without my permission.
In looking I found F8daily.com which is nothing but an automated content theft site. For example it has 18900 pages of content stolen from rangefinderforum.com, 3960 pages from kenrockwell.com, 4100 pages from APUG.com.
After filling a DMCA takedown notice becasue there was a copy of this page I posted here the clown who owns this web site called me up and insisted he had the right to use other peoples content. I told him a few timers he needs to get permission first, but he kept insisting he had the right to use it becasue the theft is automated. I finally hung up on him.
The search function on the site does nothing, so he can not claim it is s search engine. It is an automated content theft site.
In looking more I have discovered that has more of my images in use. I will be sending a few more DMCA notices. I do not expect that the owner of this forum, or other web sites can be too happy with this automated theft.
In looking I found F8daily.com which is nothing but an automated content theft site. For example it has 18900 pages of content stolen from rangefinderforum.com, 3960 pages from kenrockwell.com, 4100 pages from APUG.com.
After filling a DMCA takedown notice becasue there was a copy of this page I posted here the clown who owns this web site called me up and insisted he had the right to use other peoples content. I told him a few timers he needs to get permission first, but he kept insisting he had the right to use it becasue the theft is automated. I finally hung up on him.
The search function on the site does nothing, so he can not claim it is s search engine. It is an automated content theft site.
In looking more I have discovered that has more of my images in use. I will be sending a few more DMCA notices. I do not expect that the owner of this forum, or other web sites can be too happy with this automated theft.
You are just trying to defy the whole point of the interconnected internet. If you don't want your content shared don't upload it in the first place.
divewizard
perspicaz
I do want it shared, but since it is mine I should be able to control where it is shared. I explicitly copyright all of my images, in the image, in the EXIF, and in accompanying text. There is no excuse for not being able to find and honor that.
uinku
Established
Yeah, unfortunately there's a lot of sites like this where they just trawl other web sites for images or blocks of text.
Sorry. Copyright is an old concept that is useless in this day and age. The only control you have is not to upload the content that you do not want shared. End of story.
Pablito
coco frío
Thankfully this is wrong. My copyrighted property has brought me lots of money. Copyright is not useless. Maybe you don't need money or you have no intellectual property to sell. Copyright is like human rights. It's a right. And when people have violated my copyrighted property, I have sued them and won.
Ok, well if copyright is an old concept that is useless today, maybe the same is true of private property.
mdarnton
Well-known
Criminals have always felt that the law does not apply to them. That is what makes them criminals, Viktor.
Adanac
Well-known
While admittedly it does nothing to address what has already transpired, another avenue you can pursue: block their robot from crawling your site. Furthermore you can also contact sites like RFF and the like, sharing the technical details allowing them to do likewise.
Sadly this sort of block-an-enemy tactic can become quite involved unless you have software tools to help automate the process and even then you run the risk of automatically blocking legitimate viewers of content.
Sadly this sort of block-an-enemy tactic can become quite involved unless you have software tools to help automate the process and even then you run the risk of automatically blocking legitimate viewers of content.
shiro_kuro
Charles Bowen
.... the site does link back to the source of the information ... and the search function does work ... infact it searches all major Photography sites.
http://www.f8daily.com/search?q=leica+m6
Typed in "M6" into the search engine which turned up lots of information with links to original sources including RFF .... Never heard of this site before you mentioned it and I did not get the impression it was a an automated theft site run by a clown ..... It actually looks to be a cool resource of information ...... Google for photography .
I'm inclined to thank you for the link . What am I missing ?
http://www.f8daily.com/search?q=leica+m6
Typed in "M6" into the search engine which turned up lots of information with links to original sources including RFF .... Never heard of this site before you mentioned it and I did not get the impression it was a an automated theft site run by a clown ..... It actually looks to be a cool resource of information ...... Google for photography .
I'm inclined to thank you for the link . What am I missing ?
divewizard
perspicaz
If you search for my photos you get nothing. If you search for the camera I used you get nothing. Yet my photo is there with the camera, and with my name.
If site claims to be a search engine it should actually find stuff.
If site claims to be a search engine it should actually find stuff.
sig
Well-known
These are just links to other pages, is that a copyright violation?
I guess google is the biggest baddie....
I guess google is the biggest baddie....
jordanstarr
J.R.Starr
From my little knowledge of F8 Daily, I'm assuming they don't sell your photo or print it without your permission. They aren't "using" your photo to their own ends, it looks more like they're advertising photography in all its forms. In essence, what it looks like to me is that they're giving you free publicity. In which case, you should probably be thanking him more than anything.
I love these topics, where people openly throw their photographs all over the place, put up links encouraging people to look at their photos, etc. then complain when it doesn't end up exactly where they want it. I can understand if they use a picture of yours in an editorial column to interpret it a way you didn't intend. But they aren't selling your photograph or printing it are they?
I'd love to know how many programs, movies, music, etc. are downloaded illegally by the same people nay-saying the "improper" use of their photos. If you don't like it, keep your stuff off the internet, watermark the crap out of it, make it small with only display resolution, etc and you can minimize the effects of "automated theft". Be happy more people are looking at your photos -that's why photographers put it on the internet isn't it? For exposure? Sharing some visual inspiration? Showing the world how brilliant they are? Not saying you do any of this though.
I get the copywrite thing -you are entitled to your own...whatever. But honestly, how many people here have googled an image before of a potential travel destination, famous photographer, a celebrity or person and were thankful that an image showed up to visually educate you. If this "clown" was printing your stuff and selling it, gimme a call and I'll pick you up and we'll go pay him a visit. However, it's a site that promotes all kinds of photography. Do yourself a favour, pour a stiff drink, watch the game and calm down. It's not worth the stress you're putting yourself through.
I love these topics, where people openly throw their photographs all over the place, put up links encouraging people to look at their photos, etc. then complain when it doesn't end up exactly where they want it. I can understand if they use a picture of yours in an editorial column to interpret it a way you didn't intend. But they aren't selling your photograph or printing it are they?
I'd love to know how many programs, movies, music, etc. are downloaded illegally by the same people nay-saying the "improper" use of their photos. If you don't like it, keep your stuff off the internet, watermark the crap out of it, make it small with only display resolution, etc and you can minimize the effects of "automated theft". Be happy more people are looking at your photos -that's why photographers put it on the internet isn't it? For exposure? Sharing some visual inspiration? Showing the world how brilliant they are? Not saying you do any of this though.
I get the copywrite thing -you are entitled to your own...whatever. But honestly, how many people here have googled an image before of a potential travel destination, famous photographer, a celebrity or person and were thankful that an image showed up to visually educate you. If this "clown" was printing your stuff and selling it, gimme a call and I'll pick you up and we'll go pay him a visit. However, it's a site that promotes all kinds of photography. Do yourself a favour, pour a stiff drink, watch the game and calm down. It's not worth the stress you're putting yourself through.
Adanac
Well-known
Chris has a point - as a search engine it is pretty useless, and for that reason it is right to question the intent of the site. If the intent is in fact to bring users to the information they seek more quickly, then the search function should work.
A pretty key element to search for and within would be thread titles. Using one of Chris's photos as an example, the thread title is "Velvia 50 in a Olympus 35SP". Does a search for some of those key terms actually turn up anything of relevance?
http://www.f8daily.com/search?q=velvia+50+olympus
It turns up a lot of links but not the link in question.
How does Google fare, searching the entire internet?
https://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=velvia+50+olympus
This time the search provides the correct result - third link from the top - not bad for a general search. f8 should do far better than that, given the corpus of information it searches within is asserted to be photography centric and a relative handful of sites are being indexed at that. Yet f8 finds nothing.
Maybe they've implemented a *very* rudimentary search capability that does work (like single term, non-stemming) but if so, it isn't useful. If the site isn't useful for searching, then why bother collecting summaries from all these sites in the first place?
At this point it certainly falls on the site owner to explain themselves.
A pretty key element to search for and within would be thread titles. Using one of Chris's photos as an example, the thread title is "Velvia 50 in a Olympus 35SP". Does a search for some of those key terms actually turn up anything of relevance?
http://www.f8daily.com/search?q=velvia+50+olympus
It turns up a lot of links but not the link in question.
How does Google fare, searching the entire internet?
https://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=velvia+50+olympus
This time the search provides the correct result - third link from the top - not bad for a general search. f8 should do far better than that, given the corpus of information it searches within is asserted to be photography centric and a relative handful of sites are being indexed at that. Yet f8 finds nothing.
Maybe they've implemented a *very* rudimentary search capability that does work (like single term, non-stemming) but if so, it isn't useful. If the site isn't useful for searching, then why bother collecting summaries from all these sites in the first place?
At this point it certainly falls on the site owner to explain themselves.
shimokita
白黒
Do a Google search on the following
site:f8daily.com Velvia 50 Olympus 35SP
and it pops up as the first entry with the following
©2011 Chris Grossman
Source: RANGEFINDER FORUM
and, maybe just as importaint a list of: "Related Content" that if clicked may bring money to the f8 site. I guess that's the way it works...
Casey
site:f8daily.com Velvia 50 Olympus 35SP
and it pops up as the first entry with the following
©2011 Chris Grossman
Source: RANGEFINDER FORUM
and, maybe just as importaint a list of: "Related Content" that if clicked may bring money to the f8 site. I guess that's the way it works...
Casey
jarski
Veteran
it looks to me grabbing content from other sites, display them different layout, and thats about it.
same as sites like picssr.com, flickriver.com, fluidr.com, lurvely.com does from flickr.com.
same as sites like picssr.com, flickriver.com, fluidr.com, lurvely.com does from flickr.com.
What a ridiculous statement. It doesn't even nearly equate in importance to our human rights.
Copyright is the slowing of the progress of our development as a species and stifles innovation through the restriction of knowledge. Basically a good case for violating our human rights
Are your gramophone patents still paying off?
carpark
Established
Thanks for the link. Looks like an interesting site to get information and it gives me a link to "visit Source for complete content" if i wish.
Loads of sites do this. Can't see what the fuss is about?
I would imagine that f8daily helps drive more traffic to RFF which is a good thing
Loads of sites do this. Can't see what the fuss is about?
I would imagine that f8daily helps drive more traffic to RFF which is a good thing
wolves3012
Veteran
I don't want to be inflammatory here but the reality of the internet means that your primary control is whether to upload it onto the internet or not. If you upload it then not everyone is going to play ball. Don't take that to mean I condone a wrongdoing, if it is.