Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Forum reputation = neutral

About gnagel

  • Rank
    Forum newbie


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    11 Oct 2017

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When this photograph appeared on Alamy’s website, it indicated that there was NO property release. Glenn
  2. Thanks...I have been interacting with the Alamy Copyright team as well. Glenn
  3. I do realize that some buyers may shop around for the cheapest price of a download. Glenn
  4. What is an MS RF site? I assume RF means royalty free, but not sure about MS. The lawyer probably saw the image on Dreamstime—but it was editorial only. Glenn
  5. Thanks Betty...same to you! This too shall pass. Glenn
  6. Thanks Chuck...and I very much appreciate this advice. I will continue to participate in this thread, but will avoid disclosing any further details about this situation. It's too easy to sit hear and vent (especially with other mostly sympathetic photographers), but that won't advance my interests. Glenn
  7. Yes...my problem is that I am not familiar enough with the law. How much protection does an editorial designation give to the photographer? Glenn
  8. I had the same thought about the possible acknowledgement and emphasis on editorial versus commercial. Glenn
  9. Interesting...I wish I knew how many of those payments came from photographers who licensed an editorial sale of the image. Glenn
  10. Yes...the issue here is that I had no idea that the image was still available through Alamy. I deleted the image from all stock agencies...not just Alamy. I then checked to see if it was deleted by doing a search using the Alamy search engine box. And the image did not and still does not appear on the Alamy site. However, if one has the original link to the image...it will access the photo! I only learned of this yesterday. Alamy did say that they would remove it if I drafted a request with an explanation as to why the image should be removed from the site e
  11. I've been trying to read all I can about copyright infringements on the internet. It gets complicated very quickly. It's possible that there might be some merit that I am liable for attempting to personally profit from the work of the artist? I've seen some information that confirms that the artist must provide evidence that he has incurred damage as a result of my activity--which I don't see how he would be able to do that. If anything, he probably benefited. Apparently, the image probably appeared in a magazine promoting Buffalo. I'm concerned that the attorney might have found a
  12. Anyone taking of photo of this artwork would likely come away with a similar image. My photo was a straight shot of the mural--which filled the frame. I did not make any edits in post other than cropping and the usual white balance, contrast, saturation and sharpening adjustments. I embedded my copyright information in the digital file--stamped by my camera. I did not file any copyright information with the government. Glenn
  13. Thanks...I've had a feeling of anger as well. When I was first contacted by the attorney back in June, I was super cooperative--told him that I had no intention of infringing upon the artist in any way and that I would remove the image from all of the stock agencies within the hour (which I did). At the time, he was focused on Dreamstime--and I told him that the image sold two times through that agency...one time I received 25 cents and the other time I received $2.00. He asked if I had proof of that, which I did, and I emailed him the life to date earnings report showing the $2.25 in earnings
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.