Dishonesty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dangermouse

Dangermouse

Squeaky Clean
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,135
Edit My Images
No
I dont know who you are yet but when the magazine gets back in touch I will name and shame you...........

For the other people reading this I submitted an image that some other ...... Has put into a magazine as their own the perils of putting images here eh....never again:thumbsdown:
 
:thinking:

Would you PM me the details? (In confidence of course if you like)
 
GarynLea said:
:eek: Unbelievable :cuckoo:
Click to expand...


I am very happy here and love the way people are but ......nicking photos is a no no in my eyes​
Castration is the only way



Steal my shot....You wont do it again will ya:nono:
 
Anyone in the world can steal a photo from this site, it's not necessarily a member here.
You can take steps to protect images eg; low res and copyright notices but that isn't always enough.
 
Susane said:
Anyone in the world can steal a photo from this site, it's not necessarily a member here.
Click to expand...


Very true, as I'm writing this there are 20 members and 53 guests here.
 
I'm suprised that the size liimit on the forum and the resolution would be suitable for a magazine
 
this is another reason i quite like spalsh a name of the owner somewher on the image. if they need to crop further then its makes it worse for commercial use!
 
Susane said:
Anyone in the world can steal a photo from this site, it's not necessarily a member here.
Click to expand...

:agree: Anyone can view the forums / internet and steal an image. It is downright disgusting that someone would do this and submit it as their own though.

Edit - Are you certain that the image was taken from TP and not an image hosting site such as Flickr or Photobucket?
 
i can't believe someone from TP would do such a thing, i think your right dangermouse, they need naming and shaming....:shake:
it makes it worse if they stand to gain from the fraud...
 
What is the picture? Could it be that they took the same picture as you? The submission criteria for the magazines normally states much higher level than normal posts on here. If someone has done that it would seem rather unintelligent as it is quite clear that someone on here will be reading said photo mag.
 
I know how you feel. I had one of my images nicked from here. Someone made themself a member and his one and only post was telling me how nice he thought my shot was. Then i stumbled across my image on his business web site. He said he was entiled to use it for various reasons and i'm still trying to get recompense.

Some people are just ....... (fill in the missing word)
 
Notts_Dave said:
I know how you feel. I had one of my images nicked from here. Someone made themself a member and his one and only post was telling me how nice he thought my shot was. Then i stumbled across my image on his business web site. He said he was entiled to use it for various reasons and i'm still trying to get recompense.

Some people are just ....... (fill in the missing word)
Click to expand...

File a Claim Form, £30 issue fee, put the value of the claim the value of your photo, say £200 and charge interest at 8% from the date of proceedings and you will win. He won't show up in court and he has no Defence, 8 weeks and you'll get results.
 
Dave Stone said:
This is theft, no two ways about it. Can you not report it to the police?
Click to expand...

The definition of theft is to:

dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive. To be theft it has to fulfill all the definition and it doesn't so it isn't, sorry.

If the other person has submitted it for a competition or another thing where there is some payment or prize then there may well be a fraud issue but that would need looking into.

I would suggest that this is most likely going to be a solely civil matter. This is not a bad thing as, on that basis you can issue proceedings and they will have to come all the way to your court. Also the level of proof is lower requiring it to be proven on balance of probabilities rather than beyond all reasonable doubt. Also you get the compensation rather than the court imposing some fine or other retribution that just makes you feel happier.
 
:lol:Anyone found steeling my pictures needs their head examined that is below the belt end of.


you name and shame i am all ears

Regards mark.
 
magazines require 300dpi to print anything at any level of quality, otherwise it will look crap.
 
horizon said:
i can't believe someone from TP would do such a thing,
Click to expand...

TP has over 10,000 members and, as such, possibly represents a fair cross section of society...it's not a closed forum and nobody's credentials are likely to be checked.

I think this matter would be better dealt with by the OP and the admin staff/mods aside from public gaze and then a statement issued when all the facts are clear and verified.....they'll only be losers if we start sharpening the stick too soon.

Bob
 
I agree, thats 10,000 members and goodness knows how many guests.

The main body of us who post daily I guess wouldnt do such a thing but there arent 10,000 or more posting daily, so lots that we dont know at all.
And it COULD have been taken from an image hosting site if thats what you use instead of uploading to your gallery here.

I agree with Matty that by the time you have made an image into 300dpi it will be very small indeed... I wouldnt have thought it would have made a decent sized competition entry.

Here's hoping its all a misunderstanding. :shake:
 
Dave Stone said:
This is theft, no two ways about it. Can you not report it to the police?
Click to expand...

A mate of mine had a £2000 motorbike stolen, he phoned the police, the response was "I'll give you a crime number, if it turns up you will let us know won't you"

I can hear the chuckles down the phone now if you try and report a stolen picture from a website
 
from my own experience of having photos published for competitions i can tell you that i had to send the original file @ 300dpi so it could be printed at least at a4 if required. Images off the forum at 72dpi 800pix wont be good enough for magazine copy. if the OP wants to email admin@ with a scan of the mag and a link to the piccy on the forum we can look at it, but there is very little else that we can do
 
This REALLY sucks...

Some people have the neck for anything but soap and water. :bat:

Sorry to hear your having this prob Dangermouse. I hope you manage to get it resolved as soon as...
 
i would name and shame (the name used fromt he mag) and see if anyone recognises them...
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
the perils of putting images here eh....never again:thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

That's a rather big claim you are making without evidence to back it up! It appears that you store all your photos in Photobucket, so chances are greater that someone nicked a higher res version from there. As said, it's probably better taking it up privately with a mod than shouting your mouth of in here without any facts.

Hope you get it sorted.
 
Well I'm going to close this now. This is quite a serious accusation.

I'm not sure exactly what's gone on, except for the fact someone has told you that your shot has been printed in a magazine, and you're waiting on a reply from the magazines.

The only shot we can see that you've posted (with the description you gave us), is quite a popular photo, one that I'm sure has been duplicated in similar circumstances the world over.

Could it be entirely possible this is what has happened?

I think it's best to hold off on the witch hunt for the moment, until you heard back from the magazine, and have some more proof which we can act on.

Suffice to say, if a member here HAS taken a photo and submitted it as their own, they won't be a member here for long.
However, for that, it is only fair we would need absolute concrete proof, and for the reasons that has been stated, I'm not sure a magazine would accept an 800px shot for print into a magazine.

For one I doubt it would be high enough quality to print at anything bigger than a postage stamp. Secondly they would require a larger size, like matty says, so they can alter their copy pages to suit the design layout they require, rather than having to 'work around' a smaller image.
And finally, surely such a magazine would realise that an 800px photo like that can be lifted from anywhere on the internet and would require at least a larger size as proof of ownership?

Like I say, I'll close this now, and if you get any more information, please don't hesitate to contact us with it.
 
I have now got to the bottom of this

The photo in question is ver much like my moon photo and was taken some months ago yet my photo was taken for a thread on here on 07.09.2008 at 20.50pm but someone said I had nicked the shot from the mag in another forum but now its clear the shots even though they are identical are in fact two shots that are not related in any way so the person who posted the first shot is not a theif at all its just a coincidence nothing more so I apologise if I have upset anyone and to the other person who said i nicked it in the first place ....please check the facts before acusing as I have
 
Dangermouse1964 said:
please check the facts before acusing as I have
Click to expand...

Dangermouse1964 said:
I dont know who you are yet but when the magazine gets back in touch I will name and shame you...........

For the other people reading this I submitted an image that some other ...... Has put into a magazine as their own the perils of putting images here eh....never again:thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Umm, okay.
 
Thanks for the explanation Dangermouse. Seems it was a misunderstanding after all.

Phew! Business as usual folks :)
 
I'm amazed any moon shot can be known to be from a particular photographer. The subject is always (pretty much) the same distance away and has the same side facing us.
 
grumpybadger said:
I'm amazed any moon shot can be known to be from a particular photographer. The subject is always (pretty much) the same distance away and has the same side facing us.
Click to expand...

Agreed, unless it has specific foreground interest that would make it distinguishable they all look the same (ish)
 
another point to note is that magazines are at set for publishing 4 weeks before they appear on the shelves, so the shot in question would have been taken and set for printing at least 3 weeks before the OP took it.

anyway, all done now i think?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top