Facebook frustration and possible solutions

[inlina]

Does anyone else out there have ongoing issues with people taking the 'proofs' from their galleries and using them on Facebook and other social media?

I shoot mainly at BMX racing at the moment and I know most of the people around the track. Last year I won the tender to shoot the state championship and set up an e-commerce site to sell full well knowing that people would probably just download the images and potentially post them on Facebook etc. So I thought that having a watermark that made the pics useless for print and fairly obvious that it was wrong to repost the image elsewhere. (click here for an example of the watermark).

It turns out I was wrong. In this day an age of internet piracy, many people don't seem to respect the concept of copyright be it adults, teens or kids. I found many people that I have as FB 'friends' blatently posting pics from my galleries. My wife and I sent messages to many of them asking them to take them down. Some did it and were even apologetic. My wife got into an argument with the parent of one who claimed the teens don't know the meaning of copyright (but does she know what stolen means...that is embeded into the picture too). For the remainder I had to file copyright infringments with FB. One kid reposted the same pics after FB took them down and we had to go through the motions again. As time wears on and I shoot more events, some kids keep posting my watermarked pics and I find 'friends of friends' also posting. It is frustrating.

So the solutions I see:

Option 1: Stop shooting BMX/public events. I don't want to do this because BMX and other sport are what I love shooting the most.

Option 2: Drop the ecommerce site. If I do this though, I might as well drop the public event photography as this seems to me to be the best way to sell.

Option 3: Try and get this fixed once and for all via Facebook and the other social network sites. It should not be hard for social networking site to check the exif data for copyright on upload, either the word or the symbol. I would suggest that most photographers shooting as a business are having their camera or their software adding copyright embedded in the exif. If youtube can have a bot that scoures videos for copyright audio, then the social networkers should be able to check exif for copyright. The only problem I see with this its it will take one or multiple photography associations or businesses to force this. I am just a one man business. I don't have a clue where to start to drive this solution from.

Option 4: The legal system...ie. a class action suit. A last resort if option 3 doesn't get up, and it may force the social networks to take on option 3. Again, would probably need associations and larger businesses to drive it.

Anyone else having similar problems? Your thoughts on the options (even if you don't have the issue)?

CG

[vsa]

Some sites disable the use of right mouse button so you can't just save the pictures like that. Of course this doesn't prevent anything but just makes saving the images harder.

[TFord.LTTP]

Well I honestly doubt how much these social networking sites care about this let alone the many other privacy issues plaguing them that they refuse to do anything about and continue to make worse unfortunately. The best recourse may be to continue to follow the motions where the use is degrading the quality of your brand and hoping that otherwise your name and work are getting more eyes on them. Certainly no lawyer but I'm not sure how effective the legal option would be. Unless there's major defamation and damage to your brand going I would imagine that any perceived losses would be extremely hard to quantify and prove. Then there's the complications with it being the internet and people all across the globe. Like you said unless a major artists rights advocacy group or something was to take on this cause the cost would certainly far outweigh any gains to be had by the individuals involved.

The approach I'm taking as a whole right now is what the major corporations seem to do in only go after the person if they're using in a negative light, it doesn't give credit or they're profiting off it because unfortunately when there's little to no real accountability on the internet it's really inevitable to some degree. There is also TinEye, which photoshelter uses as well, if you take that route where it stores the "fingerprint" of the photo then should be able to find most uses of it on the web if anyone is going that route.

[OsmosisStudios]

Option 2 is giving up, Option 3 wont happen: Facebook wont do it. Option 4 may be your best bet, but you may not have to go that far. A simple Cease and Decist letter usually gets the message across.

[lonni]

Do your galleries require sign in?

If not this is the first step you need to take, and in every sign on page you need to state teh fast that signing in means you agree to the terms and conditions, not taking teh photos etc, and spell them out clearly. You also need to say that if they take teh watermarked images they will be liable for the price of purchase.

This is how i manage my online proofs for logo design etc. and seems to work.

You also need to get a programmer to stop the right click to save on your images. It wil make it harder to copy them, but not impossible.

I have also heard that it is possible to make the images black when someone tries to use the print sceen function to copy an image. Try a programmer for that.

I dont think that any of your options are to be considdered. FB wont care and a class action sounds a bit over the top.

if there is some one still blatantly using your images you should go to a solicitor and get a letter drawn up to ask them to stop using them.

[kuvahmagh]

Facebook is based in the US correct, if it is would a DMCA letter work, with something like that it is possible they would remove the account, particularly if you have already gone through the process before with them and they continue to just repost the material.

[sk66]

You may want to change the site you use....or make your own.
If it is a flash gallery you cannot right-click-save an image. If you place a transparent image over the pic then right-click-save copies the transparent image.
Nothing that I am aware of will stop a screen capture.

However, IMHO if they are low res thumbnails WITH your watermark I think you might ought to look at it as "advertising". You might even be able to deduct the "value" of the images as an advertising expense (I'm not sure).

[elkidogz]

You have a few options to you for websites.

1. reduce the size of the images your offering in your proofs to like 100x100px or even smaller.
2. add a more ugly and visibly distracting copywright to the pictures. (a large circle that isn't 100% transparent, that's sorta red) to distort the image so that it isn't attractive enough to steal.
3. create the proofs in flash, there by removin the image all together.
4. overlay the image on the website with a blank image (see flickr). that way when they do try to steal the image, instead of the image, they would get a blank image.
5. disable the right mouse button. (have it pop an alert instead that explains the copywright

[BigVinnie]

Do you offer any options for people to have an image to post to social media sites?

[GadgetRick]

In answer to your question, no, I don't really experience this problem all that much. Does it happen? Yes. I use SmugMug which disables right-click but there are ways around that if you're determined enough.

Honestly, I don't believe there's much else we can do given the world we live in now. It's unfortunate but, it is what it is. All we can do is try and catch when people do it and ask for credit or for them to remove it. Luckily, it's not a huge problem for me.