ShutterStock.com used by "Design Weasels."
Like 99% of all the rip-offs of my art I was informed of this violation via email from the agency who originally hired me to create the art for them in the first place. They spotted my artwork being sold on ShutterStock.com.
Having my artwork ripped off is nothing new to me. Unethical corporate weasels can be effectively dealt with via legal measures to hold them accountable. It's a pain to deal with but as you can read in the linked post can be successfully handled.
What upsets me the most is so-called fellow designers or in this case a "Design Weasel" by the screen name of "Milann" who took my hawk mascot art and repurposed it under the guise that it's their own creation and uploaded it to his/her ShutterStock.com account so they could sell it to other designers who purchase pre-fab art on the cheap.
My original "Black Hawk" artwork.
The one aspect about being an Illustrative Designer I love is the creative process. Actually working through the development of ideas, refining my art and seeing it come to life and enjoying how others respond to it. That in and of itself makes all the effort to create the artwork worth it for me. The fact I get paid to do it is awesome.
Not only are these design weasels causing me problems but they are missing out on the best part of being a creative, and that is to create. They will never know the true passion and joy found in the midst of a creative process if they just rip-off the end result from other creatives. It's kind of sad really and just flat out wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin?
Animated comparison. Direct lift of my artwork.
Perhaps the design weasel in question will read this post? With that in mind let me talk directly to designer "Milann" who ripped me off.
I suggest you take serious inventory about your own career path. You've been caught, your identity might remain nebulous, but you still know how much of a design weasel you've been in doing this.
You can choose to keep acting like a design weasel, ripping other peoples artwork off and refusing to be an actual creative, or you can realize you've mad poor choices and turn over a new design leaf and start over. Challenge yourself, make a commitment to design excellence and begin to grow your own skills and talent so that you can truly be a successful creative and stop being part of the problem. It's your choice.
Corporations Hide Behind DMCA
Since Clinton passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) back in 1998 online businesses have been hiding behind it when copyright violations are discovered on their own sites. In a nut shell a company can post anything they want and get away with it as long as it takes before someone notices, once they are notified of the copyright infringement all they have to do is remove it. No compensation is given, no royalties paid, no usage fees given. The artist basically gets screwed and the company hides behind the DMCA to justify all of it.
You can read about it for yourself via this DMCA PDF.
Weasel designers and weasel corporations are usually found nested together in their weasel dens of design iniquity.
Hopefully sites like ShutterStock.com will exterminate the design weasels and do a better job of vetting their content. I realize full-blame should rest solely on the shoulders of the individuals who choose to steal the art to begin with and use stock sites to distribute it.
Personally I wish Google would buy a company like Tineye.com and really make this type of searching more viable for artists to monitor who is using their work without permission. Then stock companies could plugin to this service and make it part of their upload protocol and help prevent design weasels from flourishing online.
Follow Up - Phase 1
I know some will disagree with me but I feel when a company like ShutterStock.com hides behind the DMCA like weasel corporate suits it doesn't help anyone. And I'm sorry but I find this statement they provided a little bit self-serving:
"Shutterstock's Privacy Statement constrains me from providing the information you request regarding the alleged infringer."
So let it be known that anyone can use a service like ShutterStock.com to distribute stolen art and they'll cover your back from any legal repercussion via their own self-defined privacy statement if you happen to get caught. Seems like a conflict of interest to me?
I'll give them this though, they have pulled the artwork down and closed the account for the user "Milann." Good, that is an appropriate response. But to say that "Milann" is an "Alleged Infringer" is just corporate weasel talk. Seriously, is there any doubt that this clown stole my art? I'm not alleging anything, I'm stating fact. But I digress.
Follow Up - Phase 2
OK, all is resolved now. All I need to say is Twitter rules!
15 comments:
Wow.. Who does this? That is sooo lame. I'll be surprised if shutterstock don't take that down immediately.
Von- sorry to hear about this. Thanks for posting on this though- this is really good info to get out to the design community so that we know how to defend ourselves when the time arises. I've been trying to rewrite my contract and meet with a lawyer recently to insure that I am doing everything I can to protect myself and my clients from activity like this. Best of luck- praying that this turns out well for you!
I think this is a rip off, but I don't think this is the DMCA's fault and for SURE not ShutterStock's responsibility if they do something about it promptly.
However, since they have not yet responded, then they should be held accountable to a degree, but like YouTube, if they just remove it right away I don't think a company should be accountable for their users actions.
think about it, MySpace, YouTube, Blogger, Google, Digg, almost every site that has user submitted data would go bankrupt. Not including all the hosting companies.
I believe the DMCA is perfectly fine as long the company deals with it by removing the content, andthee violated should be punished, but not the company!
If it makes you feel any better Von, I checked the shutterstock.com website and the vector stock of the hawk is "temporarily Unavailable". At least no one else can buy it. Big fan by the way.
I sure hope ShutterStock does respond to your copyright requests. I've used them for about a year and a half and liked them. This may change things, unfortunately (for them). And they better believe that the design community—especially online—is quite tightly nit and this WILL affect their credibility and ultimately their business. There are too many stock image sites out there and I'm sure competition is tight. If I find a disreputable company, I can easily go somewhere else. I would hate to find out that images I've used in my work were a copyright infringement!
Oscar,
The problem with DMCA is that like ShutterStock.com is doing they are hiding behind it. I realize they can't control the users, but if I ask for them for the contact information of the user who stole my work and uploaded it via their services they should comply to that request.
But they don't, they hide behind the DMCA which allows them to justify it via their own self-designed privacy statement.
So essentially anyone can steal art and ShutterStock.com will shelter them from the consequence if caught because they won't disclose who they are to the infringed party.
That is wrong period the end.
Von
Not that I agree with what happened, but I understand that Shutterstock couldn't give out the name: no company on the planet would, DMCA or not.
Hear me out.
Companies like SS get calls all the time about stolen images/artwork, model releases, etc. (I work in the industry, for a competitor). Consider it from their perspective: some guy calls up and says the work is his. They should investigate, but they have to give the benefit of the doubt to the contributor until they do their homework. It could just be some pissed off competing illustrator calling up. SS has no idea at this point.
BUT, if they are doing their jobs, things will get sorted out quickly. They did the right thing deactivating the image while they looked into it.
So why won't they give out the name? Not only must they follow their own privacy policies, they must follow the law as well. Whether the artwork was stolen or not, the thief would probably have a case against them if they released his name.
Instead, you need to go through the proper legal channels. You've been wronged, so make it right, even if that means suing (I'm not a lawyer, so by no means take this as legal advise). I believe that if you've registered that image, there are statutory damages of up to $250,000 (that's US--I'm in Europe so it's a bit different). Don't get mad, get even ;) Also look at how many times they've sold the image. You should probably get paid for each of those.
Great work, btw. Good luck.
I've had artwork stolen before too. It is the worst feeling ever. Anyway, how did Twitter help?
Quote 1 (from twitter):
I'll give any cyber-sleuth $100 if you can figure out who the "Milann" user is on ShutterStock.com (I'm cranky now)
Quote 2:
Follow Up - Phase 2
OK, all is resolved now. All I need to say is Twitter rules!
So did some twitter-cyber-sleuth figure out their identity, or what?!? Phase 2 follow up is surprisingly lacking in gory detail :(
It is unfortunate how ShutterStock can hide their identity like that, though I can understand it. It's a shame that so many people do this though, all for a buck... I can also relate as my work has been plagiarised quite a few times too (all resolved now).
I am also interested to hear Phase 2 of James's little story.
Are you going to be taking legal action or not?
FN' thiefs won't ever die off. Few years ago my game was on the black market BEFORE i've got my own authors copy.;)
I believe sites like that really could benefit from having other rules. Say for instance that you have to register with a full name, not a nick.
The fear of having my stuff stolen stopped me from posting my artwork online for a long time. I don't watermark, but I post in very low resolution with a copyright mark next to each image. I'm sure it won't stop a determined thief.
On a lighter note, how about a "no weasels" t-shirt?
Cool, did you get your idea from the philadelphia eagles logo?
http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/
Anonymous,
Always find it humorous that those who want to play devils advocate like to hide behind nebulous screen names or an even weaker cheese "Anonymous."
My hawk art is in the same genre of style as found in the NFL, MLB, and NBA sure. It's a sports mascot logo but it's not lifted from the Eagles as you implied.
You can see the whole creative process for the hawk artwork at: http://www.illustrationclass.com/?p=36
Nice try though.
Von
Post a Comment