Fine Art America is the world's most powerful sales and marketing tool for photographers and visual artists.
Simply open an account, upload your images, set your prices for all our available products, and you're instantly in business! FAA provides you with an e-commerce website, fulfills your orders for you, and sends you your profits each month.
The "Yeah - I'm so happy someone uses my images - you should be happy, too" cheerleaders will chime in in a bit.
As I said in the 1st thread ... Pinterest and now its copycats are a nightmare! A true pain in the neck and a bad hard kick for our copyright.
......... Should all of the Pinterest copycats be able to copy your images and use them on their websites without your permission? Definitely not, and definitely not mine.
You know...I'm new here and really never gave the Pinterest thing any thought...but after reading these posts and giving some much needed thought...I can see where this is definitely a problem...but what can we do???
Sean, you like to stir up trouble on Friday afternoon :-)
This isn't a question of "should they be allowed..."
They are doing it. They've been doing it. That ship has sailed. And there are a lot more ships being built and launched. Low-res images on the net are free for the taking. Just like they were when Mozilla launched their first browser. Image makers still have recourse for unauthorized commercial use, just like always.
Here's a fun fact: There are more people on Facebook today than there were on the entire planet a scant 250 years ago. Things have CHANGED. Just because antiquated copyright laws aren't changing along with technology is no reason to think that such laws are even remotely enforceable. There's no Wayback Machine and this starship doesn't have a reverse gear.
In 6 months there will be a bunch of rip-off sites yes, but in 12 months half of those will be gone, in 18 months 90% will be gone. When was the last time you heard someone talk about a Myspace clone, or a Facebook clone? The question isn't who will rip Pinterest off, it's who will replace them in 2014.
that is true, a combination of a failure of either people becoming so bored with the idea. or once you have a board in one place, why would you want it in another place that looks like the first one? all you need is one huge lawsuit, and it will probably happen, probably with a stock agency or the like. and the rest will fall apart.
i've seen specialized one for vacations (useless to say the least, i entered my zip code and it showed me stuff from around the world). recipies, i think nomnom. or something like that. they all look the same. all slow, all confusing.
If there was a class action suit, who would be suing who? For what?
The vast majority of pins are product-oriented images. The manufacturers LOVE that kind of word-of-mouth about their products. In those cases the photographers and illustrators have already been paid handsomely for their work. The companies own the images so there are no copyright issues.
Proving damages to a group of (mostly) hobbyists because people have pinned their low-res images — images that no one asked them to do, not so incidentally — is a pretty tall order.
I don't see a case for class action at all. But if someone here does, let's hear the plan.
I think NO. How to stop these copycats? The only thing I can think of is create and use your own watermark and put it on every image, then watch the sites to see if they try to sell your images. Will the internet change within the next year to prevent image theft? I would like to believe that at some point one of these sites will cross a line and try to sell a big name artist's image, then face a lawsuit. This will be interesting to watch in the next year. I just hope we don't lose a lot of images in the mean time.
I wonder how Ryan feels about being featured in Want's video:
This is a very popular discussion with 109 responses. In order to help the page load faster and allow you to quickly read the most recent posts, we're only showing you the oldest 25 posts and the newest 25 posts. Everything in the middle has been skipped. Want to read the entire discussion? No problem: click here.
What I have seen is that the 'blocking' of pins only is happening on the regular FAA site. It is not on the Limited Time Specia pages nor , much worse, on the 'personal' site.
The latter especially needs to be addressed as soon as possible. No point in blocking the copying on the regular one but not on the premium one.
As long as it links back to my site, I just see pinning as free PR.
However, I understand that other people might view this differently.
It seems that this sort of rampant copyright issue could be addressed if the industry were to address a "copyright" metatag, which the big social sharing sites would have to respect. There's something analogous for instructing robots and crawlers when they are and are not allowed to index content. Why not something for copyrighted work?
no, that's the worst case, he donated the image to pinterest. it goes nowhere at all, it's a dead end. if someone wanted to buy it, the image goes no where at all. and it still associates my name with the pini site.
how? if someone was actually interested in buying it, they wouldn't be able to find it, they instead would have to look for it elsewhere. it only has my name on it, not the title of the piece ofr the location to buy it from. and then if someone pins that or takes it from there - there is no link at all - and probably no name either. the picture has amnesia.
So Mike, as far as sales are concerned, it's as if they never saw the image. It's just more 'noise' on the Internet. It hasn't cost you a sale because they never found your image on one of your legitimate sales sites.
no. if someone were on pin right now, and they liked the image and want to buy it - they wouldn't be able to find it. like wise if someone did an image search, pintrest would come up and not my site - and it's a dead end there. it's like there's a door, with a brickwall behind it.
searches in google are usably based on how often a set of words comes up, and then probably followed by paying to be there. the more people use my name in pin, the more often it will show up in google. right now you see me at the top, but at the bottom of the page (100 per), you start seeing pinterest, and the more that use my name, the more slots it will use up in google. so instead of going here, or to my homepage or wherever, it will go to pintrest. and either they will find a maze and a jumble of other images on the page. or they will find that one image that goes no where. if it keeps up they will dominate the search for my own name. it's like introducing an animal and it takes over as the dominate species.
Very interesting and important info. Thanks one and all.
I have to agree with some sort of watermark. Remember the artist/photographer has the initial image. How ever he/she uploads on the net is the starting point a copycat can use. If his/her name is imbedded in the image than it could be free advertising. I know there are ways to take out watermarks, but the average joe/jane wouldn't know how to do it.
Another issue. The windows 7 snipping tool is very disturbing. Luckily the quality is low.
Murray and Dan. There are too many orphan images out on the web. I don't mind Pinterest as long as it is from my site with my watermarks on it. The problem is once an image is out without any credit then it will get copied and never trace back to you. The best (worst?) example of the wrong problems with it is I found images of mine that Getty had supplied to TMZ online. The images on TMZ are not credited to either me or Getty, and the trace back goes to and stops at TMZ, where the pinner grabbed them from.
Also everyone should realize that at present on FAA only the basic page is protected, not Limited Time Offers or your personalized site. Also even where you put the nopin code on a any page, they can still right click the image to open it then pin that. Watermark everything!
They would get a very poor-quality print. And they could make their own prints at home anyway.
And besides, despite all the 'burn the witch!' sentiment I see here, I believe that in court mere pinning would be seen as editorial fair use. It's basically people saying "hey, look at this!" and illustrating their comments with a pic of what they're commenting on.
And remember: there's another type of fair use: artistic use. I've seen more than one image here on this site that would bring legal trouble on its creator if not for artistic fair use, so let's be careful we don't cut off our noses to spite our faces. (Not sure about commercial use in promoting this site, though, which is something I've born in mind when voting in the TV commercial contest.)
Maybe I'm a late comer to this debate, but I just read it tonight.
I have a question, I was under the impression that Pinterest gives credit to the images that are "pinned" on there. I've had a few Pinterest members who contacted me on my Etsy shops & told me that they "pinned me" to their lists, & gave me credit for along with well wishes "hoping it would bring more attention to my shops". Which I actually appreciated. I have more sculpture & jewelry than I do paintings & photos that can be plagiarized, or printed without my permission though it has happened, & I became resolved to the fact that with the internet making photos of our artwork available so many ways, that its useless trying to keep that from ever happening at all. Its not right, don't' get me wrong, I don't like it at all! But places like Pinterest, I THOUGHT were more FOR the artists or image originators than for scamming us out of a sale.
Am I wrong???? If I am, I do want to know because I don't want to support Pinterest if they ARE a scandal. But I'm hoping there's others that agree with me & can tell me that they do credit the artist's or the site they "pinned" from. I just started my own Pinterest account, & though I haven't had any time to really play around with it, everything I've personally pinned, I also have put the artist's info & website I got it from, just in case it didn't show up on their main page. So, should I shut it down or is it an okay website????
And since the Pinterest Experiment thread is closed I'll comment on it here.
I find it (the original post in said thread and the fake profile) to be all a bit of theater. Someone pinning an image, essentially posting an illustrated comment about an image, is very much different from posting said image for sale. The fake person did not post them for sale, of course, but that was implied by them posting them on FAA and the truth would not be obvious to the probable-majority who did not look carefully.
The context of this site is art sales. The context of Pinterest is image commentary. It's not a useful comparison, and is at best a straw man.
Leslie, the real problem with Pinterest is not, and never really has been, the pinning per se. The problem has been with Pinterest's owners' plans to make money off the site as implied in their terms of service. It's since been changed, but originally it amounted to them signalling their intent to profit off the pinned images through sales, while basically using the pinners as legal human shields against liability for copyright infringement. I doubt it would work in court, though, and I figure they're either going to start selling ads or make the site a loss leader for other (legal) paying ventures, or else shut the whole thing down once they run through whatever venture capital they've raised.
@john it wouldn't be under fair use, you still need permission of some kind which is stated in their tos. it would also have to be listed as fair use. further fair use wouldn't have a giant sized picture, it would have a small one. and it's no more editorial than a blog - which has to pay for pictures. artists that use other peoples pictures either have to get permission to use them, buy them, or they would have to be marked free - you just can't use them. and if you see that, you can report that image.
@leslie pinterest people have to ask you BEFORE they put it up. once they put it up pinterest assumes that you just gave them permission to have the picture. no one has ever told me before the matter - like i would like your permission to pin your work - NEVER. pintrest is becoming a scam sites now. software is being created by hackers to change the info in an image link to go to their site when they pin it up. you think your seeing your products, but when clicked it goes to a survey or something. keep the pinterest account it's the only way to contact people. don't post your own work unless you want to lose control of your own copyright.
@ john again - yes it is for sale - to pinterest. when they tack on a link that they are selling using your content. they aren't doing this for free, they are using your image to make money - i should be getting that money for the use of my images.
basically it comes down to:
1. they are stealing my content because they did not get permission.
2. they can put whatever info they want in the box and i think it sticks now - so they can claim credit.
3. they can grab it from anywhere - like their own blog or google.
4. they store a large copy if one was found - and many can be.
5. they are near impossible to remove from the site, and they make it difficult to do so.
6. there are 1000's of clones out there.
7. people are using all of them as spam boards.
8. if they credit you, if someone is searching for you, they find pinterest - not your own homepage. the link might have your name on it, but it could be orphaned if the original link is killed, or was just a picture search on google.
Personally, why are so many worked up over Pinterest? It is a marketing tool for me, and it has been working. Having that button on FAA has been a huge help spreading the word. I think people have been a bit too nervous...
Eventually some copyright lawyer will talk some sense into the Pinterest owners and they're realize they really don't have a business model that is both legal and profitable.
From what I understand from recent psych research, creativity has a correlation with immorality - creative people are better at coming up with rationalizations. I see this born out here both in Pinterest's would-be monetizing strategy and in the self-sabotaging attitude toward fair-use I see becoming common among artists these days.
It invites downloads along with the sharing and favoriting. In addition to advertisements, their monetization comes with the upgraded subscriptions (see that here: http://www.wookmark.com/about/plus ) wherein one may download collections of images at a time.
Pinterest is the best social media marketing I've done so far, mainly because it fits my personality so well. I relate to the world visually (like most here), and I can tell in just a few seconds whether I'm going to click with someone just by looking at their boards.
In addition to pinning other artists work, I've introduced Pinterest to my commercial clients and encouraged them to open accounts. Several have. This has led to increased business from one of them and (from that same circle) two referral clients.
Pinterest is a gentle, non-intimidating way to keep an online relationship alive long enough to blossom into a business relationship. And by the time the communication moves to phones and email, you already know that at least visually you're on the same page.