Freedom of expression?? Telling the truth??
not popular with flickr administration, apparently.
so, in case anyone is wondering where my post about my stolen photos , the long caption, and all 450+ comments went (some of them very well written and containing useful information for all flickr users and photographers and web-users in general), it was deleted by flickr.
this photo composite here, remember?:
The explanation?
“Flickr is not a venue for to you harass, abuse,
impersonate, or intimidate others. If we receive a valid
complaint about your conduct, we will send you a warning or
terminate your account.”
beautiful.
i find this more than a little depressing. to say the least.
and to think, just earlier today i was talking to a reporter from one of icelands main newspapers, saying what a great thing Flickr is and how its done so much for me and yada yada yada.
i don’t believe i was harrassing anyone. I was doing the only thing left for me to do when i had tried to seek legal assistance, after being victim to having my copyrighted work stolen and resold for profit by a dishonest company. I was told by my lawyer that i should just accept the fact and move on. Im not a big fan of giving up. I simply told the truth.
the fact that people sent harrassing letters to only-dreemin was a direct result of my post, but I myself wasnt harassing anyone. I was simply making it public that someone did wrong by me, and i think that’s a pretty far cry from harrassing some innocent party directly.
im extremely disappointed, to say the least.
May 15th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Hi, If I were you I would hire a lawyer and get money from this abuse. There are lawyers who deal with copyrights infringements and I am sure you will win. You are so talented, you should get represented by some major agencies. Flikr was really bad to you, but I am pretty sure things will turn out right for you. I belong to a pro photographers forum and somebody mentioned what happened to you, that’s why I am here, and let me tell you that everybody there got inspired by your amazing work.
Have a good luck!
Cristina
May 15th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
sigh. if only you could have read what had already been written under the post. So many good comments, and all of this “you should hire a lawyer” and “you need to do that” and “maybe you could try this” had been covered over and over again. i honestly think every suggestion humanly imaginable had been put forth in that thread.
this is nothing but censorship.
thanks for the kind words tho.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Might be because you were dugg (http://digg.com/tech_news/Stealing_IS_a_crime_right). The Digg Army can be a little….fanatical, and are quite good at doing the things that flickr is accusing you of.
I’m betting they’ll back down from this soon, because you are the flickr star. If they don’t align themselves with their most popular player, they’re pretty dumb. I suspect this is some sort of autopilot/idiot event and will be rectified soon…or at least, I hope that’s what it is.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Giving up seems like a solution just in order to let things go and move on. I’m not a big fan of this. When injustices go unheralded they will just continue. I wish I had good advice for you. I know full well there is little that you, I or even accomplished lawyers (though perhaps some British lawyers have some insight) can actually do.
I hope you do not give up. I hope you do not find bitterness. I hope your artistic drive prevails. I hope by some grace of humanity, those who wronged you receive their comeuppance.
May 15th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
That’s pretty sad. While it’s a free magazine, and they are probably not making money directly on it like they do with your photos, I got a similar problem with a (free) danish magazine that now twice has used one of my photos in their mag (danish entry about it in my blog: http://www.rockland.dk/show/?post=275). But as a private amateur photographer, what can you do? My pictures are under the Creative Commons Attribution license, so they just had to give me credit as a photographer, but didn’t…
Oh, btw… I love your photos Rebekka! You must be my favorite Flickr photographer, and you make me dream even more about visiting Iceland that I did before I saw your work:-)
May 15th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
brutal. maybe it’s time to abandon flickr. better yet, do a self portrait with a flickr sticker covering your mouth. you can even call the photo “thanks for nothing”
May 15th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
This is ridiculous! You are one of the most famous people on flickr (the most famous?), and your work was stolen. It is definitely an outrage for them to delete your post.
Maybe someone still has a copy of the flickr page & comments in their browser cache. The page was http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/
Try going there with “Work offline” checked in your browser’s File menu.
May 15th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Rebekka,
That sucks that flickr deleted the photo.
I posted a comment on the digg story about this post, but i don’t know how many people it will drive here.
We sure had a good run though, huh?
I really enjoyed some of the good comments on flickr.
Good luck and if i were you, I’d keep pressing the issue till you get SOME sort of compensation.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Well, certainly wish you luck and am still willing to support you, or others in your situation in any way I can. I personally am in some sort of shock after seeing the incredible response from flickrites, Digg, and other important names around the web (thomas hawk, Strobist etc).
I hope you will keep sharing your fantastic art with us, and keep us all in the loop as to what happens with this dirty company that has caused you this grief.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Rebekka,
Well so much for free speech, though putting only-dreemin in Google shows that the incident had reached an audience far wider than flickr.
Might be worth while sticking an invoice for royalties due in O-D’s direction - you never know your luck and it would give grounds to chase them later if they default on the payment.
Keep up the photography, your shots rock.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
http://thomashawk.com/2007/05/flickr-censorship.html
Yahoo censoring you will not make this problem go away for these thieves. This really sucks. I would have thought that Flickr would have the balls to stand behind their users instead of rubbing salt into the wound and making it that much worse.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
I’m sorry to hear this Rebekka.
If this is how Flickr treats their most popular user, I’d hate to see what’s in store for the rest of us.
Chalk it up to the fact that Flickr is owned by Yahoo now, I guess.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:34 pm
This is deeply disappointing. Flickr should stand behind its members, support their stance against thieves, not censor and undermine them. I’m sorry this happened Rebekka.
We all deserve better from Flickr.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
I’m saddened to hear about this. Due to people’s lack of respect, photographers have a hard time trying to protect their copyright at the best of times. One would have expected Flickr to support one of their members in this, especially as you’re something of a Flickr success story, for want of a better term.
I wouldn’t blame you if you cancelled your account in protest, though for selfish reasons I hope you do not. And the way it’s going these days, perhaps they wouldn’t care anyway.
Startup becomes big business and completely loses sight of what it was all about in the first place. Soooo familiar…
May 15th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
[…] In case you were wondering where Rebekka’s photos and flickr post went, Flickr apparently removed it. Thomas Hawk has more. Bookmark this BlinkBits BlinkList Blogmarks Buddymarks CiteUlike […]
May 15th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
This is disgraceful. I think flickr have panicked and done something very wrong and very very stupid. Support you all the way.
May 15th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Rebekka,
I am amazed at the speed and energy that your plight has risen to the top of the blog-o-shere. I hope that you recieve good, wise counsel on what to do with this situation.
I would also like to suggest that you consider joining the Zooomr community (http://beta.zooomr.com). I do not speak for us, as I am but just a participant. However, I know that, with open arms, we would love and accept your joining our solid little family. (Plus, we don’t have any limits, uploading or file size.)
God bless you as you struggle through this,
Trevor
May 15th, 2007 at 6:56 pm
fickr should be ashamed of themselves. We, the users, are what have made flickr what it is today. Without us they would have fuck all, they should support us especially in the face of having our art ripped off.
I hope this, along with the recent JPGmag incident, isnt the shape of things to come.
Shame on you Flickr, shame on you.
May 15th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
The times, they are a-changing. I remember Old Skool Flickr, it’s more and more like it was a very long time ago. I agree with whomever that this is just a corporate kneejerk reaction and I hope that soon the Flickr folk come to their senses. In many ways you are the mascot/cheerleader/epitome/rock star of Flickr, and out of all the ugly, misogynist, crass, vulgar, immature comment strings I’ve seen on a lot of photos, I would call those far more “harassing” than anything you have ever done!
We have your back, and wish, hope, for the best of luck for you!
]kac[
May 15th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
thanks folks.
one question.. JPGmag incident??
i don’t follow….
May 15th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
I commented on your flick’r page on the same topic. I’m sorry this happened, I wish I could help… this stinks. As my Mom used to say all the time “this is the pits!”
May 15th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
So let’s get this straight. It’s now more acceptable to break the law than to point this out on Flickr? Nutters. This is why I moaned years ago about You-Know-Who taking over.
May 15th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Big last couple of days for the community:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/jpgmag/discuss/72157600216573353/
Pissed that our comments are gone …
May 15th, 2007 at 7:47 pm
one of the fundamental issues we are running into with web sites such as Flickr is that there is no accountability on their part. There is no one place to go to actually speak or correspond with someone with a name and identity who has the power to actually do something about righting wrongs. The result is that arbitrary decisions by these faceless bureaucrats hurt or help without rhyme or reason.
Unfortunately, Orwell’s 1984 is only a few years later than he predicted.
Have faith and hope….
May 15th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Rebekka
I just spent ages looking for the latest on your post. No show. Flickr deleted !!! blimey…
I would have thought they would help …
To try and be balanced I can partly see that abusive emails to the other company and posts suggesting going round and doing something to them could cause Flickr some problems - but surely those particular posts could be dealt with?
It is a real shame Flickr hasn’t taken a balanced view and alongside dealing with abusive posts , offered their support for the original issue …
Good luck - presume you have heard no more from Only Dreaming..?
May 15th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Flickr has become too big for its own good. Many top/popular photographers are experiencing theft of photos/copyright infringement and poor treatment from flickr. Only a matter of time until someone (Rupert Murdoch? Google?) capitalize on this and create a ‘flickr killer’. Until then, you have many behind you, Rebekka. Not giving up is a good thing.
May 15th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
[…] a good thing, or maybe it’s b/c my photos aren’t up to snuff UPDATE: what the hell is up with Flickr? « Previous Post | Next Post […]
May 15th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
I’m sorry.
Flickr has been steadily losing my respect… I wish Yahoo would give the original staff free rein.. but apparently this is not going to happen.
I’m sorry Rebekka. I feel that you and flickr fed off each other for so much of your respective forays in this stuff… I cant imagine flickr without rebekka and I can’t imagine rebekka without flickr.
This is like a big slap in the face
May 15th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
First, I’m sorry that your images were stolen. That is truly awful, and it shoudn’t happen to anybody. I wish that it were possible for you to get your due compensation.
Second, I’m sorry flickr did act to censor you on this. However…
You get an ungodly amount of attention on flickr for two reasons; you are a very talented photographer, and you are a beautiful woman. As such, your work - even the so-so stuff - is viewed and favorited at an insane rate.
Once, just for kicks, I counted the views as you posted an image. Within twenty minutes it had skyrocketed and people were favoriting your image non-stop. And, while some of your images are truly good work, this particular image was nothing special. And yet, the amount of attention paid to it was HIGHLY skewed in your favor, and far from anything a normal flickr user might get for a photo that was even better than yours.
I hold no grudge, and think it’s great for you, but it does illustrate just how much “beauty” matters in this world. While your images are great, you would receive half the attention, and have half the articles if you didn’t look exactly like you do.
Thus, when you run into a little problem like this - one I’ve heard countless people on flickr run into - the supporters come out of the woodwork to wish you well and damn flickr. Again, it’s nice, but it’s an illusion. The average user doesn’t look like you, and no matter how great their work and how bad they got ripped off, they would never receive the support you do.
My point… Count your blessings and let the thing go about being ripped off. If you post images on the Internet, and they are as good as yours are, you can count on them being stolen. Period.
Be happy that you are “the star” of flickr as some of the people that support you say. Because, were you not “the star” you may actually begin to understand what good photographers who don’t look beautiful go through.
And no, I’m not bitter. And no, I’m not jealous. And no, I’m not trying to be hurtful. I’m simply stating a fact; you enjoy a hugely skewed following for your work. When something less than nice happens to you, you enjoy a hugely skewed well spring of support.
I’m sorry you got ripped off, and I truly believe you are a very talented photographer, but welcome to the real world.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
@ yada:
that was one of THE most pointless comments i’ve read in AGES.
my fucking appearance has NOTHING to do with people going around stealing LANDSCAPE photos and profitting from them, and it has NOTHING to do with people going around deleting my posts and hundreds of comments from other users.
this preposterous argument about the way i look got old sometime in late 2005.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
@ yada:
what rebekka said.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
and im not quite done..
if other photographers have some sortof problem with their appearance, they should eat healthier, go to the gym, fix their wardrobe, get a haircut.. whatever.
they can NOT go around being annoyed that someone else gets nore attention, citing the fact that they look better. I happen to live a lifestyle that lends me a good, healthy appearnance. I’ve lifted weights and jogged since i was 16. I don’t overeat. i drink lots of water. my face is nothing spectacular. I have more bad hair days than good ones. (i just disguise it really well in photos). But all that notwithstanding, its just such a dumb fucking argument.
im also pretty sure of this: there are FAR MORE less-than-gorgeous successful MALE photographers in the world, really BIG photographers, that make millions from one session, than there are gorgeous female ones. if it were the other way around, if the photo industry were dominated by stunning female photographers, instead of male photographers pointing their cameras at stunning female models, i MIGHT see some glint of validity in your post above.
as it is, i only see it as bitterness.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Thanks for letting us know what happened. I had referred someone there due to the great information being shared and then found out the image and all the comments were gone and wondered what the heck happened. It irritates me that flickr did this. I agree it was probably the digg army that got out of line with threats and what not, but you are not accountable for their actions because of your post. Very poor decision to delete flickr!
May 15th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
It’s only you who can decide if this upsets you enough to bail on flickr. Pull your sight down, cancel your account, and move to another one of the photo hosting services.
Only a thought I guess, but one that might make them (Yahoo) take notice
May 15th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
i doubt yahoo gives a flying fuck at a rolling donut who uses flickr these days.
i’ve been interviewed i don’t know how many times as a sortof “success story” because of flickr, cited as their most popular user.
the impersonal way they dealt with this leads me to believe they really do not care, at all, about their users.. their PAYING customers.
May 15th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Flickr members other than Rebekka:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/inspirationrebekka/discuss/72157600219019327/
May 15th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
I was going to say something about Flickr and how they screwed up everything on Rebekka’s right to free speech, but I stumbled over this hate-filled effluvia.
@yada,
That diatrible against Rebekka has to be one of the most wreckless, hateful, revolting, and abhorrent things I have ever heard.
Tell me, what do you have against her? Are you jealous of the attention she gets? (sorry, but it has to do with talent and not on good looks)
This woman produces some of the finest photography art I have ever seen and most of the 100,000 people who visited her site in the past 24 hours would agree. And yes, she has the right to be in some of the photos…OK?
Have you ever seen her head swell to a level of arrogance on the comments she sends to her fans? She never talks down to them. Ever. What she does is engages in conversation and mostly thanks them for their support. If she disagrees she does so in an intelligent way.
When you say,
“Be happy that you are “the star” of flickr as some of the people that support you say. Because, were you not “the star” you may actually begin to understand what good photographers who don’t look beautiful go through.”
The feelings you’re projecting are of pure jealousy. So, should Rebekka stand jump in front of a car tomorrow so her face won’t look as good and then she can be a “true photographer” for you?
Please try to open your mind just a wee bit and take this in, ok? No one makes you come to Rebekka’ photostream. Her site is not a billboard on your local interstate to show herself off. It doesn’t pretend to be. It’s a place for her to share her joy and love in photographic art. Period. You don’t like it? Leave.
And leave her alone.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:03 pm
I do not get this part:
“I was told by my lawyer that i should just accept the fact and move on. Im not a big fan of giving up. I simply told the truth.”
Who is this lawyer to give such advice? Did you waive your rights? I do not think so. Anyway I know that there have been a lot of “good” advices. The one given to you by your lawyer should also be put in quotation marks.
Fight Rebekka!
May 15th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
nice work. i support you.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
I am so sorry you have to deal with this, on both fronts - the jerks who ripped you off, and the unhelpfulness of flickr. That would never have been their response in the early days. Anyhow, as another single mother/artist, I know just how draining an experience like this can be. You are in my thoughts.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
@ Yada: sorry to say but:
Yes, it does sound bitter. And yes, it does sound like the bitterness of jealousy… if your neigbour’s car was stolen you probably would not visit her/him to tell her/him sth. like “welcome to the real world”, would you? Unless it might the beautiful Ferrari you always wanted to have, of course.
@ Rebekka:
- I certainly will never get an own flickr-account because of their “reaction” regarding your post. I do understand that they want to stay out of any trouble but since they are not a small start-up anymore they should be offering help instead of intimidating their users.
- If you can proof that this is your work (which I think you can) then get another lawyer! It is your work. It is the way how you earn money to buy bread for your kids. (BTW: It is not really clever to tell the world that you just give in. It fact it could sound a bit like an invitation to steal your pics…)
all the best. cube
May 15th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
FLICKR TURNS INTO COWARDS
“To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards of people” This was a quote by Emily Cox and it applies here. Flickr for some insane and idiotic reason decided to turn into cowards.
What are they afraid of? What in the world could Rebekka’s photostream could have possibly caused any harm? Why end it? What are the repercussions?
To add insult to injury they decided to threaten Rebekka by saying, “If we receive a valid complaint about your conduct, we will send you a warning or
terminate your account.” OK.
I thought she got fucked over by getting art work stolen now she might lose her account for, uhh…exposing a scandal of lies and hideous crimes. Do they want to add a prison sentence too for trying to right a sinister wrong?
Well, Flickr does punish her with a threat to end her account that I know is a very prideful thing for her. There’s a joy, happiness, and passion in her work and her comments to her fans when she interacts with them. I used to respect Flickr…not sure anymore after this episode of shame and disgrace.
Hmmm. I can’t ever recollect anything recently as unfair as this. This reeks of something of a Fascist state. No fair game as the big bad company; and in this case the governing institution (Flickr of all people) set the rules and we just sit there and take their bullshit.
Well, I for one am not going to take this. I will follow this to the end and support Rebekka in her right to justice. Sometimes, we have to fight for what we believe in and this is not right.
Let’s not sin by silence and act to help Rebekka in her moment when she was clearly violated by a heinous crime of theft.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Everybody go to flickr and report abuse. Tell them that censorship is wrong and bring Rebekka’s page back.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
why dont u use www.deviantart.com
Everyone knows about how cool they are
May 15th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Hello,
I am rather upset by Flickr’s actions here. I have emailed them as well as put a link to this story on my blog.
I wish you luck.
–Alex
May 15th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Hello,
I am rather upset by Flickr’s actions here. I have emailed them as well as put a link to this story on my blog.
I wish you luck.
–Alex
May 15th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
Without been too contentious what yada said in the first half of his post is essentially true. Rebekka gets more hits than an average user because she’s popular, and there is nothing wrong with that. She has a reputation of producing good work, landscapes, self portraits etc. and people come back for more. That is what the community is all about. However as to yada second half well that’s just sour lemons.
In some ways it is good for the community that some thing like this has happened to a popular flickr member like Rebekka (even though I’m sure she wishes it wasn’t her) it means that other users see whats happening with the way yahoo treats users (i.e. us) and may be moved to press flickr en-masse to be more respectful of their users like the way Digg got kicked in their ass last week by the whole MPAA/AACS fiasco.
Tony Hawk has covered his censorship woes and infringements on flickr a few times, Yahoo, which is ultimately pulling the strings probably still haven’t wrapped their head around web 2.0 and cottoned on to the fact that if you mess with the users you mess with your content source.
May 15th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Whoops that Thomas Hawk, I’m sure Tony is somewhere else been extreme to the max :
http://www.thomashawk.com/
May 15th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
I got so annoyed by reading yada´s comment. What the hell is the connection between beauty and respectless treatment? This was such a dumb and sexist comment, that I (!) am really pissed off right now.
Why is a talented female artist oblieged to justify her appearance again and again? Even if there is no obvious (even none) connection between rebekka´s look and the fact, that her images were stolen and her following post was deleted by flickr.
Sorry, rebekka, I used this comment to vent my anger. I love your pics and I wish you a lot of luck. The stolen pictures were bad enough, but the reaction by flickr was the straw to break the camel´s back. I´m so sorry!
…
I´m still annoyed….”welcome in the real world”….pah!
May 15th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
I just heard your name for the first time today in the Wall Street Journal. Now I read about this on the same day. Sorry to hear about it.
I guess this is why Yahoo is #2 and always never reach the “top”. People know when a company is run right and when it is run by bad decisions. Sad, but what do you really expect?
I always thought that a good way to make money would be to print a bunch of great pictures off of Flickr and then sell the framed prints at the local “swap meet”.( do you have these?) However, I am honest, so I never did this. Sad to hear that someone else did this very thing and is not so honest.
May 15th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Although I’m Icelandic I’m writing in english because I wan’t the rest of the world to know what I have done, am thinking of doing and so on, as a citizen of the net.
I wrote a letter and sent it to all the major newspapers and television stations in Iceland with a plight to them to cover the events of this catastrophy as well as inform news services around the globe they are associated with - although I think that happens automaticly. (Darn, I just realized I forgot two of them. Gonna fix that in jiff. Might as well shoot an email off to wired.com as well.)
Also I am going to write to Yahoo and Flickr, and tell them that if I will cancel my accounts on all their systems if they insist on this approach on the matter.
I seriously think we might get a Streisand effect* on this and force them to reconsider if we all pull our weight.
best regards and all the luck to all of us
Kristján
p.s. Rebekka, þú ert hetjan mín þegar kemur að ljósmyndun.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
May 15th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
@ yada
It’s obvious to everyone reading this that you need a reason to make yourself feel better for not being more popular on flickr. The self-portraits that you refer to are almost always well thought out and thought provoking. She puts a lot of time into stirring an emotion with her unique color pallette and perspectives. I find it brave that she takes many photos of herself in inflattering poses and often shot with wide angle lenses very close to her face. I mean, who takes a bikini shot-mid winter from a high camera position and a wide angle lens if you were indeed attempting to be salacious?
It’s a ridiculous comment in general and in this particular situation, completely off topic. If you’re wishing you were the “star” of flickr instead of Rebekka, you might try spending more of your time working on a unique style instead of complaining that someone elses views are “skewed”.
And one more thing, if your point were somehow true, why does she seem to have as many female as male fans? Are they all lesbian voyeurs? Think before you comment.
May 15th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
[…] meanwhile, is facing a mini-revolt after a staffer deleted a photo and comment thread about Rebekka Guthleifsdottir and her experience trying to resolve a dispute with a company that was using some of her photos […]
May 15th, 2007 at 11:03 pm
One last thing to the “what did you expect”-fraction: The chance to commit a crime is no excuse for commiting a crime in the end. Nor should it be tolerated. Even if an artist displayed his/her work on flickr, he/she should neither accept nor tolerate the fact, that someone makes a lot of profit with it without telling the owner.
The “what-did-you-expect”-statement occurs like the old “don´t wonder if your skirt is that short”-discussion.
May 15th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
[…] check out Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir, a great landscape and self-portrait photographer. She recently discovered a huge amount of copyright infrigement of her fantastic inspirational work. She’s also one of flickr’s most popular […]
May 15th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I think people are missing the bigger point here. Isn’t the larger issue that photos are being illegally sold? Can’t we all band together to help affect change? 100k people viewed the story?
I like Kristján’s idea.
I started contacting their sources of revenue. I sent a note to a friend who works at eBay. Official policy states that only the copyright owner can report things, but back channel works. I’m also contacting their merchant provider (romancart) to advise them that one of their customers is selling stolen goods, and that makes them liable for any future sale.
If you really want to get people acting for you, post this over on Slashdot.
I find it interesting that Only-Dreemin’s contact information isn’t available on their site. Just to help them out…
only-dreemin UK
Unit D, 88 Vernon Road
Aylestone
Leicester
LE2 8GB
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1162 440 349
May 15th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
Dear Yada,
I believe after reading all the comments after you, you will eventually get a sense of reality. “welcome to the real world” is actually quite a motto for you.
as you can see, in real world, people appreciate beauty, not ugliness. and your words are real ugly.
now you still wonder why you are so bitter and not “as popular”? not your appearance certainly.
may peace be with you.
May 15th, 2007 at 11:57 pm
I’m horribly disappointed. I wrote a very windy letter to flickr giving them notice that the community which made them rich can not be treated like garbage. Without the community, Flickr is nothing.
I’ll likely be canceling my pro account soon. First it was Yahoo’s own use of copyrighted images without permission on their own sites, now this.
Pathetic.
May 15th, 2007 at 11:59 pm
somehow it seemed that i couldn’t post this here, let me try again.
Rebekka,
Here you have all my support from Beijing China. I posted on my blog part of your words linked to your not-yet-deleted letter yesterday。As I thought the anger like this should be heard and treated with respect although the chance that my blog readers might be of some help is rather slim.
I was pretty shocked and enraged to find out today that yahoo and flickr deleted your letter and all the comments. Censorship? I thought that only happened here in China!
I retrieved the letter from bloglines but too bad I don’t know how to get those comments back.
Best!
May 16th, 2007 at 12:06 am
the letter deleted by flickr:
Stealing is a crime, right?
I have a LOT on my mind right now.. to be honest, i’ve rarely been so royally pissed off as i am today.
The photos shown above all have one thing in common (besides being rather lovely landscape photos):
They were all taken , without my permission, by the London based print-selling company Only-Dreemin. This company prides itself on offering its customers only the best quality canvas prints of the finest photos , by top artists.
What they fail to mention is that some of the photos they’re selling prints of have been illegally obtained, and are being sold without the artists consent or knowledge.
In my case, a friend of mine came across their store on ebay and recognized one of my prints. (this was way back in january i think)
I looked into the matter and discovered 7 more of my photos being sold there. In the case of pictures 1, 2, 6 and 7, the image had been divided up into 3 vertical panels. ( Something i would never DREAM of doing myself. ) Furthermore, the images had been given new and exciting titles, like “Seraque II” and “Attica”, “Dawn expander II” and ” Joga” (barf)
I spent a good many days researching, going back thru their customer feedback, and was able to track back the sales of at LEAST 60 prints made from my images.
These prints sold for a total sum of 2450 british pounds (around 4840 US$ )
I gathered all the evidence , saved each webpage displaying my work , saved the list of customer feedback, printed all this stuff out and took it to a lawyer here in iceland.
She was confident that by sending them some well-phrased letters i’d be sure to get some damages out of them. After all, i had tons of incriminating evidence.
The letters did nothing other than make them take the images down from their site. Further letters got no response from them. My icelandic lawyer could do nothing else, so i was stuck with a bill and the infuriating fact that I, being only a non-wealthy art stutdent/ single mom in iceland, will have to accept that these people stole my work and made lots of money off it, and apparently are going to get away with it.
This is NOT OK BY ME.
I could think of little else to do than to at least tell people about this.
I have reason to believe that they’ve stolen images from other people, maybe other flickr users.
The reason i suspect this is quite simple. My photos were being sold under the bogus name of “Rebekka Sigrún” (the nerve of keeping the first name the same is somewhat amazing).
I saw a number of other photos being sold under that same artist name, and they werent mine. And obviously this Rebekka Sigrún doesnt exist.
Looking over the pictures i remember being sold under that name, it appears they’ve changed the artist name to “marco van eych”. If anyone knows a landscape photographer by that name, let me know. i very much doubt he exists.
So i encourage everyone that has been displaying similar landscape photos on flickr to look at their site and see if they see something suspicious.
It would also be pretty cool if as many people as possible would send them angry letters, (address them to info@only-dreemin.com ) but that’s just if you feel like it;)
ok. i’ve said my piece. Quite a load off my back.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:15 am
Yada: your argument might be logical, except I (a straight female) enjoy Rebekka’s photos and I am not attracted to her what so ever, in fact my favorites of hers do not even involve her face. If I do stumble on the photostream of a pretty girl but with bad photos, I exit my screen.
In other words…Welcome to the real world, not only are you bitter but you’re looking for pathetic excuses for your lack of internet popularity.
PS: Jealousy is an ugly thing, and if you’re as unattractive as you claim then why make it worse?
May 16th, 2007 at 12:52 am
Wow, first the censorship, then the girl gets her back up about being called good looking and welcome to the real world. As an outsider, all I have to say is western society is too confused and screwed up to possibly thrive and survive in the long-term.
Good luck trying, y’all gonna need it!
May 16th, 2007 at 1:21 am
Oh My Dear:
I`m With you!
You’re loved by flickr users… I’m really sorry for you…
A big hug and all the best =D
Be strong!
May 16th, 2007 at 1:41 am
There is a thread started in Utata about this matter. http://www.flickr.com/groups/utata/discuss/72157600219250747/#comment72157600220123420
May 16th, 2007 at 1:57 am
[…] have to be paranoid, but sadly to avoid such problems we have to. I’m a huge fan of _Rebekka and it pains me to see that she is dealing with this, but the reality is that a little knowledge […]
May 16th, 2007 at 2:02 am
Geez, is flickr trying to severe ties with the photographic community or what?
That’s a real shame to say the least. Be sure to explain your displeasure and lack of support in cases of copyright infringement if you get any publicity. That definitely should not go overlooked.
They are simply siding with the infringers. Which is disgusting.
I wish you luck on fighting this.
What some don’t understand is that every battle won against those that abuse the work and art of others provides jerks with one less reason to misstep in the first place.
I hate when someone says it isn’t worth fighting or tries to place blame on you. Especially, when you are actively taking a stance to defend your rights and artwork. The only ones that deserve this sort of thing are those that don’t excercise those rights and do nothing to protect them.
Keep it up.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:08 am
[…] thankfully the story continues. Check out _rebekka’s update, blog and Thomas Hawk’s take on […]
May 16th, 2007 at 2:16 am
@yada
It is people like you that make it ok for others to be selfish. It is people like you that make others think it is ok to give up on what is right. It is people like you that make the real world a real ugly place a lot of the time.
I do not think it should matter who leads the goodfight. I’m just thankful someone is.
I have never seen what rebekka looks like. I have only seen the images she took that she explained were stolen. I don’t care why so many people were first inclined to join her side.
All I know is that because of them this issue has been put in front of tens of thousands of people that were previously ignorant about copyright and what is ok and not ok.
I know I will have a slightly easier time protecting my own artworks now because of this. Again, I’m thankful Rebekka is not a pushover and is out to prove just because it is on the internet it is not ok to use/take/sell her art.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:39 am
[…] How did Flickr/Yahoo deal with it? They’ve deleted her images! […]
May 16th, 2007 at 3:08 am
So, Rebbeka, where will you go from here? I don’t mean this as a challenge, it’s a bona fide inquiry.
Unfortunatley, as you know, your situation is a situation that has been experienced by many other artists, writers and photographers. We get ripped off, we are one person with limited resources trying to fight against compartmentalized corporate entities with big bucks. What will you do? Keep posting your artwork on Flickr, or for that matter elsewhere on the web (it’s as easy to steal from your site as it is from Flickr)? I struggle with this issue. Sites like Flickr have much future potential as a revenue stream for people who would like to sell their images, but putting your images in the public domain makes them easy to steal. What is your assesment of the cost/benefit ratio after this incident? I just opened a Flickr account, after much trepidation. I have had other accounts on similiar “photo sharing” sites and terminated them because my images were pirated. I just can’t make up my mind if risk of posting saleable shots will pay off. It hasn’t yet - at least not directly.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts, and the thoughts of others.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:31 am
Rebekka: Like everyone else, I am sick that someone other than you has made money from your images. That isn’t right. I would add a note of caution though: don’t get involved in a legal process to make yourself feel better. That doesn’t happen. The law is not for fairness, or for justice. It’s a nasty system that can be used to get what you want if you play the game right.
My 2 cents, and warm wishes.
p.s. I am visiting Iceland this year, not least because of your images - maybe the Iceland Tourist Board should give you a cut
May 16th, 2007 at 3:31 am
[…] Just when the outrage over the theft of Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir’s photos by Only-Dreeming was beginning to calm down, Yahoo/Flickr finally reacted.You’d expect that they stand by their paying customer, who got her pictures stolen precisely because she decided to use Flickr to showcase her work, enriching the Flickr website in the process and ultimately benefiting Yahoo as a corporation. But no, instead they behaved just like you’d expect a soulless, gutless, dumb corporation to behave: they stood by another corporation, who probably had its lawyers send Flickr a nasty letter, and screwed the individual customer! […]
May 16th, 2007 at 3:33 am
Rebekka, really sorry to see it come to this. Poor, poor show from flickr and Yahoo! Which muppet makes this kind of decision???
May 16th, 2007 at 3:34 am
Hi Rebekka. I’m annoyed that Flickr removed that photo and thread. When I saw it was gone I was hoping you’d just made it private after legal pressure from the other party.
If you want any of the information or explanations regarding company and copyright laws here in the UK (note however that I am not a lawyer/solicitor), please contact me off forum and I’ll give you that info again.
Good luck with getting this resolved to your satisfaction.
Firefalcon (my ID on Flickr - at least until I decide if I want to remain there.)
May 16th, 2007 at 3:40 am
As much as this might hurt Rebekka, you posted a link to the company’s website and a link to email them.
You may not have been the one to pull the trigger but by doing that you were well aware of what was going to follow.
Incitement/harassment big issues for web sites.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Your terms when you signed up would have told you that.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:50 am
[…] Give Rebekka your support here. […]
May 16th, 2007 at 3:59 am
So, I don’t know if you have contacted eBay about only-dreemin selling your copyrighted content, but there is more info at:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/tp/vero-rights-owner.html
They say that it must be the copyright owner who files the complaint. Get those bastards where it will hurt!
May 16th, 2007 at 4:14 am
It’s available in Google’s cache.
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:yY2UfVXkf60J:www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/+http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Someone should save it and reproduce
May 16th, 2007 at 4:15 am
Yada: What is the exact point that you’re trying to make? That it’s a bad thing that Rebekka is bringing this problem to attention? Or that she’d only be allowed to talk about this if she didn’t look the way she does?
Even if her popularity was solely due to her looks it would still be a good thing that she’s pointing to this problem (which does not affect her alone, btw).
May 16th, 2007 at 4:22 am
Wow, Flickr didn’t handle this situation very well. They could have temporarily hidden your photo, so libelous or inflamatory comments could have been edited/deleted. Or another course of action that circumvented deleting everything…
Let’s hope they learn something from this incident, and do things differently in the future.
By the way, Rebekka, I did manage to find some of the comments on the deleted photo in Google’s cache:
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:yY2UfVXkf60J:www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/+http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:w5Of79VLPfMJ:www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/page3/+http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8
It’s only one fifth, but it’s still something.
May 16th, 2007 at 4:38 am
[…] to Flickr about it, and gathered hundreds of comments. However the Flickr Staff have seen fit to delete that photograph, giving the reason Flickr is not a venue for to you harass, abuse, impersonate, or intimidate […]
May 16th, 2007 at 4:42 am
this is unbelievable!!! I wanted to look at the new comments on your photo today, and there’s nothing anymore!!
I think that flickr’s beahviour is unacceptable. they’ve built their success on photographers’ work and they are now acting against the interest of one of the most talented and successfull photographers on flickr. I can’t find words…
all my support (for what it’s worth…)
Paolo
May 16th, 2007 at 4:44 am
[…] משתמשים הניזונות מתוכן גולשים. הסיפור כולו מסופר אצל רבקה ובבלוג של צלם פופולרי אחר - תומאס הוק (המנכ”ל של זומר […]
May 16th, 2007 at 4:51 am
as someone who originally hails from Leicestershire I offer my apologies on behalf of these disgraceful thieves. unfortunately arseholes do exist in all geographical locations and I have emailed the gits in question, and encouraged my personal contacts to do the same, letting them know just how low they have sunk.
on an up note - stunning work, absolutely stunning.
May 16th, 2007 at 5:19 am
My god - this is outrageous. I had read your post on flickr yesterday…. and now it’s gone.
Are flickr quietly selling people’s photographs or something?
I’m gobsmacked…
May 16th, 2007 at 5:44 am
[…] |Rebekkas Blog Artikel| - |Thomas Hawks Meinung und Kommenteren zu/bei/über Flickr| - |oder gediggt bei […]
May 16th, 2007 at 5:48 am
[…] 16th, 2007 by tinfoiling A huge controversy has evolved around Rebekka and someone ripping her photos off. Then Flickr reacted, then retracted but when you view the […]
May 16th, 2007 at 5:49 am
Man.. try not to get too down about this, although it must be just horrible. Keep up the incredible work and fuck the corporate haters! You have tons of people behind you.
May 16th, 2007 at 6:16 am
Came across this story on www.photographyvoter.com - it’ll be very interesting to see how this one develops - I’ve recently being reading more and more as regards the issues with the use of images from Flickr. I await with interest to see if Flickr will make a public declaration on this one..
May 16th, 2007 at 6:25 am
Flick Photographer Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir has photo deleted by Flickr…
Freedom of expression?? Telling the truth?? -not popular with flickr administration, apparently.
so, in case anyone is wondering where my post about my stolen photos , the long caption, and all 450+ comments went (some of them very well written and con…
May 16th, 2007 at 6:39 am
Yep ! I’m on Flickr too and i really like your work, too bad we can’t see it in full size anymore. But it’s cool anyway.
That’s the probleme with flickr. My ex girlfriend told me about a guy at her last job (webdesign) that told her flickr was a cool database that they were using for their work. Just crop a picture, change two colors, and let the musiiiiiic play.
That’s what they do call “The Web 2.0″. People posting free content for everyone to enjoy so no one will have to pay for anything.
Many graphic design societies are using flickr pictures.
Anyway, keep your good spirit !
May 16th, 2007 at 6:55 am
Dear Rebecca,
It’s very sad that Flickr has deleted your picture. I find it unacceptable. As you said and many people has repeated, it was not a threat to anybody but just a public space to comment on what has happened.
Probably the company selling your photos got in contact with Flickr and threated them, because I bet they can hire a lawyer with the money they made from selling your pictures.
I was writing the company expressing my dissappointment for having read that they had been selling your work. I told them that of course I won’t buy anything from them. Is that harass? I don’t think so.. I just was expressing my point of view.
Flickr sucks a bit (a lot) lately with this thing of “decency” filters, deleting pictures, etc…. I’m sorry to say that it’s a reflection of the double moral that somehow characterizes the States. I bet there are many nice people there… but in general the country has a problem with this double moral of decency.
I would suggest to create a blog to complain about flickr, or better…why don’t we write flickr instead of writing the company? We can “threat” flickr saying that if they do not take care of the copyright or they continue with this censorship…then we might reconsider to renew our suscriptions…that will hurt them! For sure!….. we should remember that WE PAY for flickr… so… as customers we might have the right to complain, don’t we?
I just can tell you: keep on taking those fantastic pictures! You are the best!
May 16th, 2007 at 7:01 am
Regardless on how Flickr felt about the case and what complains they might have got about the picture, it is still pretty harsh by them to delete your image and all the comments related to it.
If they felt forced to remove your image from public, they should have modified its visibility so that you and only you, Rebekke, can access it. That way they would have responded to complains and at the sametime let you retrieve all the information that peoplel had put in comments and do whatever you want with it.
While the original case with only-dreeming was nasty, I think flickr’s response to your image was even worse. With this trend going on, I don’t see much point in extending my flickr pro account, once current subscription expires …
May 16th, 2007 at 7:27 am
I followed the original thread on Flickr yesterday too and can’t believe that it’s been censored in such a way by being removed.
I really hope you get some justice in this - you totally deserve it.
Interesting to see that the theiving scum’s website seems to be showing an awful lot of blank pages today!
Good luck and KEEP FIGHTING!
May 16th, 2007 at 7:36 am
Hi Rebekka,
I’ve been an admirer of you and your work for a long time on flickr - old skool I guess. But flickr is changing and not for the better. I suspect quite a few people will not be renewing their subscriptions in light of your censorship. Their loss. And as for the people who stole your images? Well, their site appears to be down and hopefully they have suffered and terminal lack of confidence.
I remember reading about a digital watermarking service that can insert an invisible copyright and watermarking device, but most importantly can track usage of your images …
It ain’t cheap (starts at US$79 per annum) but it might be worth considering for the future - I have no connection whatsoever with these people:
digimarc.
Hugh
May 16th, 2007 at 7:45 am
but most importantly can track usage of your images …
scratch that, seems like it’s only available for the “professional” product which costs 500 bucks a year. Too expensive!
We need a cheaper alternative!
May 16th, 2007 at 7:47 am
[…] wonder that I’ve posted a deleted picture yesterday and still leave it on my blog. But the story of Rebekka is going on and new unbelievable things happen. I was watching my contact’s photo stream on […]
May 16th, 2007 at 7:49 am
How dare flickr/Yahoo do that?! They should be protecting members’ rights.
May 16th, 2007 at 7:53 am
flickrl, is one of the most superficial sites on the net….
May 16th, 2007 at 7:54 am
it is all about “fantastic picture” “fantastic picture” “fantastic picture” “fantastic picture” “fantastic picture” “fantastic picture”
May 16th, 2007 at 8:31 am
In aticipation of Yahoo! fnucking Flickr up, I deleted my account when Yahoo took over Flickr.
Yahoo bought Flickr because of its user base. If Yahoo don’t fix this and give you an apology, you and everyone supporting you, should delete their accounts or at least their photos.
Deleting one account probably won’t matter (but I’m glad I did), but a few 100 delting their pictures on flickr and leaving a message as to why, will.
As will blogging about it. Keep blogging!
I wish you the best.
May 16th, 2007 at 8:31 am
Oh Flickr, what have you become - what has Yahoo done to you. I’m really sorry to hear about this, Rebekka. I saw in your photostream that you got an apology, though - that’s a start, at least. Any word on whether the picture will be reinstated?
May 16th, 2007 at 8:36 am
it wont. they claim its “impossible” (might be a little work, but i seriously doubt its impossible)
May 16th, 2007 at 9:21 am
[…] for support and was upheld by hundred of thousands of people all around web including those over Flickr and Digg. She had raised her voice against a company stealing images shot by her and selling […]
May 16th, 2007 at 9:35 am
[…] Rebekka posted, but they also deleted all the comments which were left by the community! This is the notice Rebekka got: Flickr is not a venue for to you harass, abuse, impersonate, or intimidate others. If we receive a […]
May 16th, 2007 at 9:39 am
This is so messed up. First you get ripped off then flickr gives you a kick in the butt (deleting photo). talk about adding insult to injury…….
Let’s see how well they can “monetize flickr” when they piss off too many of the best photogs and they go somewhere else. Maybe Zoomr? pbase, photo.net, etc, etc.
I don’t expect flickr to be utopia-perfect, but this is stupid.
May 16th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Rebekka, chances are you dont need a lawyer. In the UK you can either make a Small Claims Court application (no lawyer needed, just filling in a few forms) or report the company to the UK Trading Standards Office.
The only downside is when theres a Small Claims Court hearing you’d need to be present. Its a fair amount of form filling but if your case is as strong as you say it is, it should be a formality.
The Small Claims Court is for the settlement of business issues below a certain amount, as lawyers getting involved at that level is too expensive to make the pursuit worthwhile. Its still legally enforcable though, and the image theives would be required to present a defence or lose by default.
Flickr is increasingly being seen as a cheap or free source of imagery for companies and commercial entities. Its contrary to the original remit of Flickr and is profoundly damaging the incomes of full time photographers into the bargain.
Theres a forum on Flick now called LAW which is attempting to increase knowledge of these issues. I’d check it oput if you get the chance.
May 16th, 2007 at 9:50 am
[…] is al vrij lang actief op Flickr, en wordt volgens Thomas Hawk als “old skool” beschouwd. Maar Rebekka is boos. Nadat ze op haar Flickr account haar frustraties had geuit over de weigering van Online-Dreemin om […]
May 16th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Looks like all the suggestions have been made Rebekka; I wish you well in getting the recognition YOU deserve for YOUR pictures. As for Yahoo/Flickr, its a disgrace on their part!
Regards
Chris
May 16th, 2007 at 10:00 am
That really is a shame, I love your photos and you deserve to get all of the credit that you deserve.
Flickr has to get out of the censorship game or they will find themselves quickly losing their popularity.
May 16th, 2007 at 10:10 am
I just heard about all of this through a friend and, as a photographer, my heart goes out to you. I know that it’s hard enough to make it through this business doing the craft that you love while rarely making a profit; let alone getting hit with blows like this.
I hope you are able to receive some kind of compensation from them and that the other photographers who’ve had their work stolen from them can do the same.
May 16th, 2007 at 10:20 am
I tried to go to the web site of Only-dreemin and you only can get to the home page. Other pages are not available and give error messages… I think we should e-mail them en masse and tell them what we think of all this!
info@only-dreemin.com
May 16th, 2007 at 10:35 am
I’m blown away by this. I can not believe Flickr would do this. This can’t the world we live in.
You have our support.
May 16th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Well, it’s a good thing we didn’t have enough space to print the part about how great flickr.com are, lol
I hope you get some kind of relatively fair resolution out of this in the end.
Regards,
— Gunnar Hrafn
May 16th, 2007 at 10:40 am
FYI, incomming Slashdotting. You’ve been posted here: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/16/1247201
May 16th, 2007 at 10:50 am
[…] It was two days ago that Rebekka shared all this with the world by posting an image on flickr. Unfortunately, Flickr has taken down that image, but she made a post about this matter on her blog. […]
May 16th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Is Flickr out of its mind? I had blogged your post on StumbleUpon, now I’ve updated to this one. Shame on Flickr!!!
May 16th, 2007 at 10:57 am
[…] the search cache because the bastards deleted it off of Flickr in a move to kick someone when she’s down. Throwing this up here to preserve it because I […]
May 16th, 2007 at 11:14 am
I am also very upset about the way that Rebekka has been victimized by unscrupulous art thieves and then further traumatized by Flickr’s response to the whole affair.
I joined Flickr just to post my support for Rebekka in this matter (it was posted to an Olympus Camera User’s mailing list) and after seeing how things worked out I will certainly not be posting any of my images there. In fact, I am giving serious thought to moving my website hosting away from Yahoo’s Small Business site.
I don’t know much about copyright law, but I do know that in the United States it is a criminal (not just a civil) matter now: there are serious fines and jail terms handed out for theft through copyright infringement. So: the site of the theft (Yahoo’s Flickr) is a U.S. company; and the location of the stolen goods’ sale (eBay) is a U.S. company….
Consider: if an British man were to mug and rob an Icelandic woman in New York City, and sell the jewelry so obtained in Los Angeles, would he be immune to prosecution because neither the victim nor the criminal were U.S. citizens? Of course not! Now, I realize that things are not as clear-cut as that in cyberspace but, perhaps someone with a little more knowledge on these matters could look into this for Rebekka? I am sure that any kind of criminal conviction on her behalf would bolster her chances of success (and lower her out-of-pocket expenses) in any subsequent civil case…
P.S. Beautiful work, Rebekka. I doubt that any of the people who stole your work understand what it is like to be up at all hours of the day and night just to catch those magic fleeting moments that so fully express the depth and breadth of a special place, in order that others might enjoy them without all of that effort!
May 16th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Rebekka,
your story is just unacceptable.
This short comment is just to let you know a discussion is going on about your case in the Milano Flickr community: http://www.flickr.com/groups/milanomilano/discuss/72157600220713039/#comment72157600220928069
I’m not sure their attitude will turn out to be a good choice for the Company itself.
Riccardo
May 16th, 2007 at 11:23 am
I’m truly sorry to hear about this. I dumped my Flickr membership a couple of months ago and this makes me all the more glad that I did.
One piece of advice to amateur photographers out there; do not post your full resolution images online. The pros learned this lesson a long time ago. There is still a chance that your lower-res versions will be “borrowed” by some lazy web designer but you will minimize the chance of some scumbag selling your prints with their name on it.
May 16th, 2007 at 11:35 am
Maybe we all should add the photo and the post to our Flickr Account.. Just like digg revolt
thay can’t manage hundreds of users at the same time..
May 16th, 2007 at 11:57 am
I’m a bit slow, so please explain to me: How was Rebekka harmed? She doesn’t (as far as I can tell) sell prints of here art, so Only Dreemin can’t have hurt her income. They should pay royalties, obviously, but why death threats and so much talk of huge lawsuits?
May 16th, 2007 at 11:57 am
Good luck with all of this. A lot of photographers out there hope that you get what is due to you for your photos.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
I realize that the following comment is clearly not in line with what others have posted here, but….
While I feel terrible that your photos were reproduced without your consent and sold under a pseudonym, I’m not sure why this is surprising. You posted your photos to a public forum on the internet. Of course they’re going to be reproduced! Once content you post is out on the internet, you have no control over it.
Furthermore, people who are angry at flickr: flickr is a service, one that has to protect their own legal liability. In any case, if you read flickr’s terms of service, you’ll see that their actions were probably taken for this reason.
One last thing. If you’re angry that someone could possibly reproduce your work without your consent, remember that flickr has the legal right to do so. Read the terms of service agreement:
“With respect to Content other than photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service other than Yahoo! Groups, the perpetual, irrevocable and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed.”
If you seek to gain popularity and make a name for yourself, services like flickr are great, but if you’re a professional who hopes to make money off of digital content, I would not use flickr or any other service like it that requires you hand over the rights to your work. As a professional, you probably also want to water mark any photos you upload.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Evidently, Flickr IS a venue for image theft!! I’m canceling my paid account with Flickr…
By the way, your photos are BEAUTIFUL.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
I dont believe only-dreemin bought the pictures off some 3rd party that sounds like a big lie. There is no way they paid £3000 for image files. This could be easily prooved in court. Even if they did buy the rights they are still liable for abuse of copyright. Even if they did not know.
You will find Getty and Corbis the big photo companies are suing anyone around the world who is using there pictures without consent for approx $1000 per picture. And alot of people are running scared. There is a company that retrieves money on a commission basis for Getty and Corbis. I will let you know if I find out.
Some people dont realise that you cannot use other peoples photos. But Im sure only-dreemin knew what they are doing as they sell stills form movies.
I dont think only-dreemin are making alot of money either. They have been selling on ebay for a 2/3 years now and if you look at sales they are low.
But I would look into recovering compensation. Get a lawyer who specialises in photo copyright based in London.
May 16th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
I saw the news on slashdot then I realized Rebeka is one of my flickr friends.
I have written an article about this very topic . I think the fact that all of our user generated content are so concentrated on Flickr and YouTube or similar websites, would leave them at the mercy of corporate greed or Pro-Censorship governments. I have recommendations for Open Source developers to start planning for building decentralized online communities and media management systems similar to flickr or youTube, and also develop technologies so people could export, migrate, and import their content to a new place with few clicks of a button.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
change for ipernity
May 16th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
@Fortean: do i need to show bruises in order for you to feel i was “harmed”?
it doesnt matter wether or not im selling prints of my images at the moment or not.
that doenst give someone else the right to do it.
Im living of student loans at the moment.
I had to pay my lawyer for the work she did on this case, which resulted in no damages paid to me by Only-dreemin.
i spend an entire weekend gathering evidence. It was a great deal of work.
So i would say this has affected me a great deal.
i personally don’t feel any need to be payed any HUGE sum of money. But getting NO money , when they’ve admitted to what they did, is also hard to accept.
And not for the first time, i would like to say that i do wish some people hadn’t gotten so carried away with their letters, of course any threat of violence was completely uncalled for.
perhaps it WAS wrong of me to write that line about sending letters in the first place, considering how things turned out, but i must say i think they had it all coming.
if they’d run their damn business in an honest way none of this would have happened.
can’t feel very sorry for them.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
@anonymous: strange view, really…
Point 9 of “terms of service agreement” says something completely different (I’d dare to say opposite) to your post:
“With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Service other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available”
I draw your attention to the sentence “solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available”.
1) Dreemin is NOT Yahoo
2) Dreemin is obviosuly printing and displaying these pictures for a commercial purpose other than the one the photos were submitted or made available
3) As Flickr people are duly worried about their civilian and criminal liability they should take a better care of legally protected rights of people paying good money to display pictures through their website. This would not be the first case for a “service provider” to be considered liable for making a “crime” to easy and taking no technical countermeasure: do you remembre Napster??
Riccardo
May 16th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
@Rebekka
Yes. Specifically because I am concerned with your use of the word damages. Damages come in two forms: compensatory, and punative. Compensatory damages are awarded for actual harm done to you, financially. As far as I can tell, because you do not sell prints, this amounts to 0$, your legal fees notwithstanding. You are also probably not going to recieve punative damages, because at the first documented point where they were aware these works infringed your copyright, they removed them.
AND you incited what amounts to mob violence aginst them. AND you continue to assert that they are dishonest (potentially libel, as it most certainly has hurt their reputation). AND you seem to suggest you are not in the least bit sorry about any of this. (’can’t feel sorry for them’)
May 16th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
The Photography Web-o-Sphere Sell-Out Trifecta…
Popular Flickr personality gets her images stolen and sold for thousands of dollars: That sucks. She posts to Flickr for advice, to warn others of the rotten company, etc: Obvious thing to do. She then gets the post killed by Flickr because Flickr is…
May 16th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
I was wondering, you could perhaps setup a PayPal account and every reader of your Blog could give you a dollar or two, so that you’d be able to afford a lawyer ? I know this worked in the past, and I certainly can spare a few bucks to help you.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
@fortean: a lot of fantasy in your words.
If you want to exploit (or even just use for your own pleasure) somebody else’s pictures you’re the one who have to get the author’s consent.
This means the rule does not work the other way round: it is not up to the author to tell you that photo cannot be used.
The general rule is: other people’s photos cannot be used unless you get their permission (and no vice versa)
Dreemin infringed this specific law (existing in all western countries and specifically in the EU): because of that they DO OWE to pay damages! (and royalties, of course!)
That’s it.
I agree damages will not be Millions ££ as Rebekka is not (yet) Sebastiao Salgado but still Dreemin is liable (at the very least) for their careless conduct.
As for the Rebekka boycott campaign; Dreemin get the reputation they deserve and as far as statements made by Rebekka are true she risks nothing and her reaction was perfectly proportionate.
Dreemin should better look for an equitable settlement of their misconduct (and Rebekka should really hire a lawyer in London: this is not a difficult case).
I’m ready to contribute to this legal action as I think this could be a leading case teaching a lot to Flickr management too.
Riccardo
May 16th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
You did a good work on the radio today. You have all my sympathy and I wish you the best best in your struggle. Good luck in the future.
May 16th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Read this how Getty and Corbis chase copyright infringement for fees:
http://www.fsb.org.uk/discuss/forum_posts.asp?TID=194&PN=4
Some very good information in there. Please note only dreemin are still liable for copyright infringement because even if they did it by accident.
Good luck.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Where, precisely, did Dreemin go wrong? The photos were provided to them on a CD with incorrect identifying information. They paid for them. It is emminently reasonable for them to have believed they had legitimately secured the right to reprint these photographs. I agree they owe royalties, but damages are awarded in response to harm, of which I see very little convincing proof of.
As long as the statments made by Rebekka are true, yes. Prove to me the company is dishonest, that what they have said is untrue, and I will step back from my point about libel. The mob violence issue stands, however, and BECAUSE of this mob reaction, I believe an equitable settlement would entail no money paid out at all, with Dreemin agreeing not to resell Rebekkas work. Or perhaps some sort of licensing deal, Rebekka really should sell prints. (I feel I should mention I am a fan of your work, Rebekka, but I disapprove of the way you handled this situation.)
May 16th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Flickr is just a bunch of corporate drones w/o a mind. Apparently stealing is of a higher class than protecting one’s copyright according to them.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
You should consult w/ Carolyn Wright - Photo Attorney. She has a new book out about legal rights for photographers. www.photoattorney.com
May 16th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
these are the 2 top London law firms who are chasing photo theft for Corbis and Getty. Corbis is owned by Bill Gates.
Baker & McKenzie
and
Moreton Smith
Find out how much it will cost or if they will do it on commission.
Best of luck.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
[…] was to be short lived. Only hours after it hit the front page of Digg, Yahoo!, who owns Flickr, removed the post. According to Guðleifsdóttir, Yahoo! cited alleged terms of service […]
May 16th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
[…] en llegar a la página principal de digg. Minutos después la fotografía fue eliminada y Rebekka recibió el siguiente mensaje de la administración de […]
May 16th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
I’m sorry it must be tough to be censored like that!
May 16th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
This was all over the Icelandic media today, both major newspapers and one of the major radio channels covered it, more coverage is forthcoming. High profile lawyers will eventually be commenting, etc., this thing is moving forward imho.
May 16th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
[…] Rebekka’s blog post […]
May 16th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
@Fortean: so Dreemin will be very welcome to explain where and how the purchased those pictures but they will have to do that before a judge and they should try to be convincing.
THEY should indicate the seller and he must be a relaible one (i.e. they cannot simply say we boght the pictures from a guy with fair hair…).
The seller wil then be drawn before the judge too (at Dreemin costs) and explain how he got the pictures and so on…
If Dreemin can demostrate they acted cautiously then i agree with they will not be convicted (the seller will…) BUT THEY have to demonstrate the fairness of their conduct and NOT Rebekka their misconduct.
A good starting point for Dreemin coud be explaining why they did not answer to Rebekka’s letter.
BTW I never heard of Rebekka before today but I hate this kind of bullism against weaker/younger artists performed by so called “companies”.
Riccardo
May 16th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
[…] it on Flickr, under a composite image of the images that had been stolen (still available at her blog), starting a major @#$%-storm on Digg, Reddit, thomashawk and elsewhere. •The page on Flickr had […]
May 16th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Rebekka
I feel very strongly about the principle of pursuing justice but only if it doesn’t hurt your artistic pursuit. I have been tracking your flickr images and read what there is to read. I won’t say very much more since everyone here and at Flickr had said them probably far better than I can but I offer you a glimmer of hope. It appears that I do have a complete web page of your flickr commentary PLUS the messages that others had sent you. If you like me to send them over to you, do reply offsite to my email address and I’ll find some way of porting the whole lot over to you. I hope this will help you.
I’m with you all the way!
May 16th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Oops,
I was not quite correct with my recent mail to you. I only have the first page….
Sorry…
K.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
[…] Yahoo, which owns Flickr. Their “solution” was quick and dirty: they removed the photographer’s pictures from her Flickr account. It seems their people are too busy to bother figuring out who the images really belong to, so they […]
May 16th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
@fortean,
Without doubt, I think one of the biggest travesties in life is that you were given a brain.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
must say im disepointed by flickr.
strange that they just take a stand in a case where you obv have done nothing wrong. this must be a thing people can talk about, without getting blindly censored..
how can flickr censor something and give a explanation that not a singel member aprove of.
its like we are in a community and they in china..
i have never in my life seen somebody getting censored for harass, abuse,
impersonate, or intimidate where it wasent wery clear. the explanation given is just tragic and sad! i would have expected flickr to stand by one of theyr most popular members.. especially when you obv have a strong case.
you have every right to expres your feelings and telling people the truth!
all the best. your photos are wonderful!
May 16th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Yahoo Is Evil.
The Yahoo TOS enables it to suspend or cancel your account for any reason whatsoever. There are many, many “abuse” forms scattered through the sprawling Yahoo site that enable random internet nutjobs with grievances to flag your account. Enough of these and you can get shut out automatically. If this happens you may *never* regain access to any of of the resources associated with that Yahoo MemberID, and some or all of those resources will eventually be deleted and unrecoverable. Yahoo CSRs will remain clueless about the “reason” for your account suspension, refuse to re-instate you, and simply repeat “TOS Violation” because that’s all their database shows.
This is why internet consolidation is bad.
May 16th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Rebekka, I read your plea, found out about it on slashdot
I will do what I can by spreading the word. I feel for you.
I started my book and before I even finsihed the 2nd chapter, I had spoke to my attorney about what I need to do to protect it. Currently I do not have any of the book online, but very soon I will be doing so to receive some feedback.
Feel free to contact me if you believe I can help you with anything
Thank you for the notice… Creative people need to band together to protect our work as our own.
May 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pm
[…] (con mas de 400 comentarios) que parece que al final flickr decidió devolver, no así la imagen. Este es un blog de Rebekka, donde comenta la censura de flickr y las imágenes en […]
May 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Rebekka
someone in me UK has asked me for your cannot demits as may what to cover your story
would you like to get in touch?
Stephen[at]cotterell[dot]net
May 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Oops!
Rebekka
someone in me UK has asked me for your contact details as may what to cover your story
would you like to get in touch?
Stephen[at]cotterell[dot]net
May 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Wow, there’s some silly comments on here from a few choice persons (ahem, fortean, and others demonstrating grand designs of dim-wittery).
Rebekka, I am a big fan and am also truly sorry this happened to you. Please keep me posted if you move to another service in the future.
Hi T.H.!
May 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Yahoo, People, Flickr,…
Yahoo has a new mission statement. I first saw it on Read/Write web.
Last night, Yahoo! announced their new mission, “to connect people to their passions, communities, and the world’s knowledge.” While Google emphasizes the data, Yahoo! w…
May 16th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
[…] can read more about this appalling incident at Rebekkah’s WordPress blog. I first read about it at […]
May 16th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Below is the DNS info for ONLY-DREEMIN.COM
——–
Registrant:
tracee mayes, (traceemayes100@hotmail.com)
2 bretby road
aylestone
leicester, leicestershire LE2 8QH
GB
Domain name: ONLY-DREEMIN.COM
Administrative Contact:
mayes, tracee (traceemayes100@hotmail.com)
2 bretby road
aylestone
leicester, leicestershire LE2 8QH
GB
+4401162837125
Technical Contact:
mayes, tracee
2 bretby road
aylestone
leicester, leicestershire LE2 8QH
GB
+4401162837125
Registration Service Provider:
UK Reg,
+44 1452 541252
+44 1452 538485 (fax