Ebay--reproductions, theft, copyright, etc...

[grandduchessella]

You're right about Ebay's reaction. An author of one of the books frequently lifted from even complained and got blown off so I don't know what the average person can do. I don't know why Ebay even has a regulation unless it's purely for legal protection.

I checked back just a few minutes ago and the item has actually been removed from sale. 

[Mazukov]

Indeed all. I’m not that good when it comes to Photoshop work. I’m more into the coding.
I would suggest that somehow all the photo’s that have been placed within this forum be taken down and watermarks be placed on them. One’s that have been worked on.  One thing that drives me crazy is someone stealing someone else’s hard work fro there own profit.But understand this is after all the world wide net and we have to always deal with people who are on the shady sides of things.Protect your work, and don’t let others profit by your hard and honest work,

[Marlene]

But as I stated sometime ago, posting photos that are under 75 years old violate international copyright laws.  Scanning photos from books can also violate international copyright laws because the photos used for the books may not be under 75 years old - even if the original image is.  Moreover, images may be out of copyright, but the images may be owned by archives, photo agencies, etc., and  as they own the prints, they own the rights to how the images can be used.  Book publishers pay for the use of the photos in the books.   I know you don't like to hear it - but there's no point complaining about what others are doing, when posters here are doing the same thing, even though there are no fees involved here.   Copyright protection, also known as intellectual property laws, is not about money, but about the protection of someone's word or image or music or ideas.  Yes, it is nice to share, but one has to remember that posters here are not sharing their personal photographs.  They are "sharing" material found in books,  scanning photographs, etc., which violates international law.  Posting images here does not fall under fair use (or educational).   

If posters can find the time to scan and post, they can find the time to find the copyright holders and contact them for permission.   There are no excuses for this matter.   I certainly do not condone what the ebay sellers are doing because it is fraud.  But I also do not condone the posting of images here without getting permission from the copyright or rights holders. 

Indeed. This was the reason this thread was started.
I have found that reporting them gets nowhere, as a fellow AP member and I went to great lengths at some point earlier this year and got nothing.
It is sad now that we cannot share images between each other without having to watermark them. *le sigh*

[Marlene]

"Protect your work, and don’t let others profit by your hard and honest work"   This is a good statement.  However, unless you wrote the material, or took the photo, it is not your work.   Now, I have a postcard collection - more than 6000 cards -- I can probably use without permission, images that are 75 years or older, but I cannot use for publication anything younger ... why?  I don't have the right under copyright law.   If Svetabel owns an original print - ie, a cabinet photo - she would have the right to complain  - but if she scanned it from a book -- she has no rights.

Indeed all. I’m not that good when it comes to Photoshop work. I’m more into the coding.
I would suggest that somehow all the photo’s that have been placed within this forum be taken down and watermarks be placed on them. One’s that have been worked on.  One thing that drives me crazy is someone stealing someone else’s hard work fro there own profit.But understand this is after all the world wide net and we have to always deal with people who are on the shady sides of things.Protect your work, and don’t let others profit by your hard and honest work,

[grandduchessella]

I was the one who dragged Svetabel into this. The photos referred to were from another site--one on the Russian Church--which Svetabel also posted a link to. They weren't photos she scanned. My main objection in this case was that most of us don't speak Russian and wouldn't have ever come across that site. These 2 particular sellers on ebay seem to make a practice of hanging around this Forum for the main purpose of taking photos that people post and selling them, thus exploiting the goodwill of the site and perhaps making people less likely to even want to point people in the direction.

The whole issue of copyright is a separate argument--and one that I have taken to heart and I either post links to websites (such as worldroots.com) that have photos up or sites such as gettyimages.com or post items from my own collection (past 75 years), although I'm sure I occasionally slip up, I am trying to get better.  I gave a blistering to the seller of the Ella photo--I don't know whether others did or if Ebay finally stepped in--but the image was removed from sale.

[Marlene]

Thanks, Ella.  Unfortunately too many do not understand that scanning photos or even posting regular photographs violates the law. For example, if user of this forum scanned a selection of photographs from a new book on the Romanovs,  and that publisher discovered this, she (and the owner of this site) would receive a cease and desist letter from the publisher's lawyers ... remove the offending items or we will sue you for copyright violations.  Trust me - these letters are vile.  I had to employ the use of one a decade or so ago.  Most people who get such letters remove the material.  Those who don't ... well, it ain't pretty.

However, I should add that Ebay probably is not ignoring the complaints.  However, they cannot take action UNLESS the copyright holder complains, as they are the ones being violated.   It also helps to provide the evidence.  But only the copyright holder can do this.  Others can complain - but only the copyright holder can provide the evidence.   

I was the one who dragged Svetabel into this. The photos referred to were from another site--one on the Russian Church--which Svetabel also posted a link to. They weren't photos she scanned. My main objection in this case was that most of us don't speak Russian and wouldn't have ever come across that site. These 2 particular sellers on ebay seem to make a practice of hanging around this Forum for the main purpose of taking photos that people post and selling them, thus exploiting the goodwill of the site and perhaps making people less likely to even want to point people in the direction.

The whole issue of copyright is a separate argument--and one that I have taken to heart and I either post links to websites (such as worldroots.com) that have photos up or sites such as gettyimages.com or post items from my own collection (past 75 years), although I'm sure I occasionally slip up, I am trying to get better.  I gave a blistering to the seller of the Ella photo--I don't know whether others did or if Ebay finally stepped in--but the image was removed from sale.

[grandduchessella]

Wasn't this posted on here?



It's now up for sale as Item #150138993761. The seller's name is different but I think it's the infamous lacrimae (mentioned on the very first post) since he/she uses the same (false) statement for EVERY photo:

"This photo is a reproduction of an antique postcard of my friends collection, it was made by a professional photographer (friend of mine) on Fujicolor Crystal Archive Photo Paper (no scan, a real photographic reproduction of an original one)."

[covenant]

I got conned by lacrimae after spending 20 pounds on a few photographs, but after extensively speaking in legal terms to the seller I managed to get a refund thankfully. I wouldnt have minded too much if the image had actually been restored and printed professionally, but it seems he was just downloading images from the archive and printing them off at a cheap photo kiosk (where you put your cf ,etc, card with the images in).
One of my businesses deals in professional printing (so I usually pay for the rights or obtain real postcards/photographs) and I really get annoyed by these people who are selling the items like a business via eBay.

[grandduchessella]

Sorry to hear about your experience with lacrimae, covenant. If you read back over the thread, you can see other members have had run-ins. If you sell repros, fine (if you actually own the rights to them as many people may, including a few members of this board who have, and still do, sell repros of they're own items--old postcards, CDVs, etc... are popular items and a person may want to recoup some of their cost) but many of his are often obviously lifted and he's just flat-out lying about it, acting like he's taking them from original sources (even if they are still within copyright) but they're really 2nd or 3rd hand--that's fraud but ebay doesn't seem inclined to do anything about it.

[covenant]

It is possible to get the illegitimate sellers off eBay, as they are selling the illegal reproduction photographs as a business and not selling them off as even discarded personal keepsakes or exhibit materials. Unfortunately as you mentioned individual e-mails to ebay in regard to these matters tend not to get anywhere, but i'm sure if various emails to Beinecke were made (I noticed lacrimae obtained almost all of his/her images from here as the ones sent to me had the same dust particles, colour settings; which any 'antique postcard of a friend's collection' wouldn't have) something would be done as they offer a printing service on the same images. I'm guessing they'd also have the rights to sue through loss of earnings on their printing service as lacrimae is printing them off as a business.
But browsing through eBay seems to find alot of cd, dvd & videogame copies which makes this sort of case less a priority for them but in legal terms it should just be as potent.

[grandduchessella]

Beinecke was notified by several people here but they didn't seem to care about it.  Charlotte Zeepvatt (who had several items from her books being sold) also contacted the various sellers, and ebay, but they didn't seem to care about that either.

[dmitri]

Clockworkgirl21 that photo is hilarious. Alexis sure was cool wearing jeans and late 20th century tops! He has also grown and his neck looks a touch uncomfortable! Poor guy!

[Eddie_uk]

Is this photo genuine?? I doubt it.

[covenant]

Grandduchessella, I think you briefly mentioned this- but i've just noticed a user on eBay called dropax who is lacrimae it would seem; same title style, same incorrect description, same low quality images and also lives in germany.

Item number: 150138613369 on ebay

[grandduchessella]

Yes, I noticed the similar style as well. I think they are the same person.

Eddieboy--the photo was posted here (though I can't for the life of me remember by who  ) and I think it's genuine and was from a video on Ella, I believe. It may have been a composite photo but from the time rather than a modern-day photoshopping.