Ebay Inc. Stole my Pic !

[flashover]

Andy I can see your point. But I look at it this way. Ebay is a bussiness and a big one at that. They have yet to give me a break even when I had problems with a buyer refusing to come throught with payment. They got theres and that's all they care about. they make you jump through hoops to get anywhere. So they don't deserve any breaks. Give them an inch and they will take 10 miles

 

[rover]

This isn't funny, but it is kind of funny Stephen. You can't make this stuff up. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[clintock]

I'd be happy if they did away with the stock photo thing altogether.. well, on second thought, seeing the horrid shots people try to make of their photo equipment, maybe not. "I went digital, now this M6 is not good enough for my advanced skills, so I'm selling all my old film stuff" and the shot is out of focus, with an on-camera flash from a digital compact, blown out white table top, and totally black figure of some kind of camera, at a large distance.. with a big flash reflection glare from the glass on the camera/lens..

 

[wintoid]

Classic post, Clintock. That rings so many bells 😀

 

[Ash]

if you get well above $3000 can I have $40 to sort out my paypal dispute please?? 😀

 

[rovnguy]

I notice that B&H watermarks all the images of equipment that they have in their "used" equipment section.

 

[rbiemer]

I just got an email from Ebay:

We are writing to notify you that your review of the product

Voigtlaender Bessa-R2 35mm Rangfinder Camera

has been removed. This was due to the Guide being removed from eBay.

I guess they "discovered" that the pic wasn't theirs to use.
I am still in the "top 5000 reviewers" though😀 and last time I looked at the page, 8 out of 8 people found my review helpful. Thanks to folks from around here, I'm sure!
Rob

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Think of your poor "brothers" on the RFF ....
Let's all consider sharing as our next goal.

Ah, if things were that simple. Steve should first stick it to Da Man for Da Man stickin' it to him. We'll deal with the whole mushy brotherhood thing later.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Reality check-
If Stephen hasn't registered the photo with the copyright office then he will be lucky to get a dime. If ebay refuses to pay his invoice there is nothing he can do because no lawyer will take the case. Here's a lesson for everyone. You must REGISTER your images with the copyright office (And its cheap) otherwise your copyright notice in the real world means nothing. I hope Stephen has it registered.

I'm no lawyer, but that's not how it works. As long as you claim copyright where you've published or posted your work, it is immediately, legaly copyrighted by you.

The disclaimer, though, has to be made. The only reason you would want it registered is to be absolutely sure you can get royalties for your work. Even the U.S. Copyright Office considers it a "formality". They encourage it, though:

http://www.copyright.gov/register/

 

[flashover]

just had a look. stolen pic is still there but the review is gone. Hey ebay you make enough money pay for the photos don't steal them

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Let me assure you that this IS how it works. The Copyright office may consider it a formality, but the court system definitely does not! Technically you can not get punitive damages (which is how you make money in a copyright case) unless the work is registered before the use takes place. This is the reason why you won't be able to get a lawyer to take your case unless it is registered. Without registration, you can only get the value of the use, which pretty much puts you into small claims court since a lawyer will not take your case. I am not a lawyer, but this is how it works is the real world, at least in the US. If you don't believe me, ask any other professional photographer, the APA or the ASMP. I wish it were simpler.

Then it's a sad state of things if a law, such as it is, is meaningless if no lawyer has the balls to stand up for it unless they have a piece of paper (which is what the Copyright office allegedly was trying to alleviate: paperwork). But that's what they say, "posession is nine 10ths of the law".

Hmm, sounds like I have a lot of paperwork to do. I guess they need the fees. Law infringement sure is a business.

 

[jan normandale]

I'd be happy if they did away with the stock photo thing altogether.. well, on second thought, seeing the horrid shots people try to make of their photo equipment, maybe not. "I went digital, now this M6 is not good enough for my advanced skills, so I'm selling all my old film stuff" and the shot is out of focus, with an on-camera flash from a digital compact, blown out white table top, and totally black figure of some kind of camera, at a large distance.. with a big flash reflection glare from the glass on the camera/lens..

I often wonder what kind of photographic genius can take a digital camera and (with a preview screen to check the images) take out of focus, blown out, glare covered images. Most people can only take good images with digital cameras today even if they are 'record shots' So how do they do that?? LMAO!

 

[chrish]

Let me assure you that this IS how it works. The Copyright office may consider it a formality, but the court system definitely does not! Technically you can not get punitive damages (which is how you make money in a copyright case) unless the work is registered before the use takes place. This is the reason why you won't be able to get a lawyer to take your case unless it is registered. Without registration, you can only get the value of the use, which pretty much puts you into small claims court since a lawyer will not take your case. I am not a lawyer, but this is how it works is the real world, at least in the US. If you don't believe me, ask any other professional photographer, the APA or the ASMP. I wish it were simpler.

i'd second this. I heard bert monroy (the photoshop realism guy) do a talk on having images filed with the copyright office because he had a suit against a magazine company that used one of his images without permission and he lost the case. it had mostly to do with him not having the image filed, but i dont remember the details exactly.

 

[dostacos]

Think of your poor "brothers" on the RFF ....
Let's all consider sharing as our next goal.


Raid

sorry Raid, I pointed it out so I will claim the "finders fee"😱 😀 😀 😀 😀

 

[dostacos]

I'd be happy if they did away with the stock photo thing altogether.. well, on second thought, seeing the horrid shots people try to make of their photo equipment, maybe not. "I went digital, now this M6 is not good enough for my advanced skills, so I'm selling all my old film stuff" and the shot is out of focus, with an on-camera flash from a digital compact, blown out white table top, and totally black figure of some kind of camera, at a large distance.. with a big flash reflection glare from the glass on the camera/lens..

you forgot the necked guy reflected in a chrome product 😱

 

[ddutchison]

I just got an email from Ebay:
Quote:
We are writing to notify you that your review of the product
Voigtlaender Bessa-R2 35mm Rangfinder Camera
has been removed. This was due to the Guide being removed from eBay.


I guess they "discovered" that the pic wasn't theirs to use.
I am still in the "top 5000 reviewers" though😀 and last time I looked at the page, 8 out of 8 people found my review helpful. Thanks to folks from around here, I'm sure!

Sorry, but they didn't take the guide or the picture down, just your review. I've just left another review in it's place referencing Cameaquest's page with the picture, as well as this thread. Is anyone here a member of Slashdot?

 

[BrianShaw]

The picture and all reviews are gone... only the description remains.