When should we report cases for potential infringement under new Alamy Focus.

[spacecadet]

49 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

What i had hoped was that i would have been told if there had been a download and if the client was known to Alamy.

I've always been told if there was a "relevant download" on a query whatever the time delay (although I always wait three months now)- so if this is no longer happening, it's unhelpful.

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

I found one in early March and don't think that it is a usual Alamy client and no credit.

 

I was told to wait three months. This seems to be different advice to that just given in the post above.

 

What i had hoped was that i would have been told if there had been a download and if the client was known to Alamy.

 

missed UK business hours, so will send query later tonight, will let you know what they say.... I am hoping for similar a yea/nay regarding download data. 

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, spacecadet said:

I've always been told if there was a "relevant download" on a query whatever the time delay (although I always wait three months now)- so if this is no longer happening, it's unhelpful.

 

same here, and just got confirmation on a distributor download that hadn't met the unpublished 4 months required wait, will see what happens on this one. (actually this is a reminder the 4 month is actually today, but since they have a confirmed download, and it's one of the $3 fees no point really pushing it since there is no penalty ever in these cases) 

[meanderingemu]

On 12/04/2022 at 14:10, meanderingemu said:

 

missed UK business hours, so will send query later tonight, will let you know what they say.... I am hoping for similar a yea/nay regarding download data. 

 

slight back and forth delay as I was now asked to confirm if image is exclusive to Alamy, though i assume this imply there was no matching download as if there was one the question is moot. 

 

This seems to go against section 16.7, which states that contributor have to "promptly inform... suspected third party infringement of copyright ... in respect of any of the Content" .

 

 

I am really grateful that Alamy is pushing the infringement side and I am happy to work with them in a way beneficial to all parties, but i really look forward to the day we have a clear well defined process that focused on infringement of Content as defined under the Agreement.   

 

 

 

note i am not playing with words, this current image was on offer exclusively at Alamy, but because the flat artwork exceeds 1/3 of the image i could not have marked it exclusive under the prior terms- this actually seems to not be included under the current agreement. Shouldn't fact someone stole Alamy Content (as defined) be sufficient in the process? 

Edited April 13, 2022 by meanderingemu

[meanderingemu]

Update of the early reported suspicious case.

 

I now received an e-mail from someone i assume is related to the infringement department that a letter was sent to the potential infringer.  So it seems the "wait 3 months" does not always apply, this usages is dated at the end of March- we really need clear rule and process.  

 

The quick action do raise some issues, all i asked was if there was anything on Alamy's side to alleviate my suspicions that this may be a potential misuse as per 16.7, that it goes straight from there to UUQ is interesting, but i do appreciate Alamy being proactive in chasing these even without this step.  Now let's see how it turns out in the end.

 

 

 

added: confirm e-mail came from "infringement team", as i replied and the auto-reply was labelled from that area's own address. 

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by meanderingemu

[shearwater]

4 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

Update of the early reported suspicious case.

 

I now received an e-mail from someone i assume is related to the infringement department that a letter was sent to the potential infringer.  So it seems the "wait 3 months" does not always apply, this usages is dated at the end of March- we really need clear rule and process.  

 

The quick action do raise some issues, all i asked was if there was anything on Alamy's side to alleviate my suspicions that this may be a potential misuse as per 16.7, that it goes straight from there to UUQ is interesting, but i do appreciate Alamy being proactive in chasing these even without this step.  Now let's see how it turns out in the end.

 

 

 

added: confirm e-mail came from "infringement team", as i replied and the auto-reply was labelled from that area's own address. 

 

I’m in a similar scenario as you.

I detected a suspicious usage of one of my images published early march. I would have waited 3 months before asking Alamy, but took the word said by them in this post, and contacted with CR asking if they know something about that usage or if I should submit an Unauthorized Use Form right away.

They replied that I should send the form.

That was on Thursday. Today I received and email from CR that they pass the case to Infringement Team. A couple hours later, I received an email directly from the Infringement Team, telling me that they have written to the Infringer with a settlement request.

 

Nice that this is going so fast but, as you Emu, would love to have a more clear protocol to which stick to.

 

Best luck with your UUQ!

 

Regards

[meanderingemu]

14 minutes ago, shearwater said:

I’m in a similar scenario as you.

I detected a suspicious usage of one of my images published early march. I would have waited 3 months before asking Alamy, but took the word said by them in this post, and contacted with CR asking if they know something about that usage or if I should submit an Unauthorized Use Form right away.

They replied that I should send the form.

That was on Thursday. Today I received and email from CR that they pass the case to Infringement Team. A couple hours later, I received an email directly from the Infringement Team, telling me that they have written to the Infringer with a settlement request.

 

Nice that this is going so fast but, as you Emu, would love to have a more clear protocol to which stick to.

 

Best luck with your UUQ!

 

Regards

 

thanks for the information. one additional thing i did after was to document in an e-mail that the going forward was Alamy's unprompted decision (hence why i got an auto-reply) in case there is issues later. i did thank them for being proactive. 

 

 

good luck on yours also. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by meanderingemu

[MandyD]

I found an infringment for someone else...where do I report this?

[meanderingemu]

37 minutes ago, MandyD said:

I found an infringment for someone else...where do I report this?

 

interesting.  According to the agreement (16.7) you have no obligation to report it- obligation is only related to "Content" which is defined as 'image YOU submit", but you might want to send an e-mail to Alamy, who then would be required by the agreement (16.7) to contact the contributor if there is any suspicions .

 

 

obviously if it's someone on this forum you may just mention their forum name here like this @meanderingemu (@ sign then start typing) which will create a notice and you can discuss modality of providing info. 

[MandyD]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

interesting.  According to the agreement (16.7) you have no obligation to report it- obligation is only related to "Content" which is defined as 'image YOU submit", but you might want to send an e-mail to Alamy, who then would be required by the agreement (16.7) to contact the contributor if there is any suspicions .

 

 

obviously if it's someone on this forum you may just mention their forum name here like this @meanderingemu (@ sign then start typing) which will create a notice and you can discuss modality of providing info. 

I did a search for the user in the forum and they did not come up. I would think Alamy would want their commission one way or another. I'll send them an email and see what they say.

[M.Chapman]

6 hours ago, MandyD said:

I found an infringment for someone else...where do I report this?

How do you know it's an infringement?

 

Mark

[meanderingemu]

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

How do you know it's an infringement?

 

Mark

 

 

Alamy watermark would be one way.  

[wiskerke]

5 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

Alamy watermark would be one way.  

 

You would think that's an open and shut case.

 

However I got an email this week from the infringements desk about just such a commercial use with watermarks still present that had been going on for at least a year and that had been reported to me (with full documentation) by a fellow Alamy contributor:

We have been unable to get in a settlement for this unauthorised use, but now we are working with Copyright Protection Agencies in that country, I've passed the case to them to see if they can win a settlement on our behalf.

Mind you I chose this as a test to see if the new infringement team would do some serious chasing. I had filed the complaint the first week of July 2021, just after the announcement of the new policy vigorously enforcing Alamy copyright. Just to see how this would work.

I had of course hundreds of possible cases as I'm guessing every contributor with regular sales will have.

But because of the obvious watermarks and the commercial nature this looked to me like that proverbial obvious case.

 

wim

 

edit: Just looked up Walk in the park. 386,119 images on Alamy. One search for the rolling year.

Edited April 22, 2022 by wiskerke

[MandyD]

Yes, anything with a watermark is obvious. I sent them the link and they said they would pass it on to the infringement team. 

[meanderingemu]

11 hours ago, wiskerke said:

 

You would think that's an open and shut case.

 

However I got an email this week from the infringements desk about just such a commercial use with watermarks still present that had been going on for at least a year and that had been reported to me (with full documentation) by a fellow Alamy contributor:

We have been unable to get in a settlement for this unauthorised use, but now we are working with Copyright Protection Agencies in that country, I've passed the case to them to see if they can win a settlement on our behalf.

Mind you I chose this as a test to see if the new infringement team would do some serious chasing. I had filed the complaint the first week of July 2021, just after the announcement of the new policy vigorously enforcing Alamy copyright. Just to see how this would work.

I had of course hundreds of possible cases as I'm guessing every contributor with regular sales will have.

But because of the obvious watermarks and the commercial nature this looked to me like that proverbial obvious case.

 

wim

 

edit: Just looked up Walk in the park. 386,119 images on Alamy. One search for the rolling year.

 

 

my first submission was also something similar, with the added issue that it was not in a listed country of action under the old UUQ guidelines, nor was it exclusive (still have some images hanging around), to see what would happen. And though Alamy put it first at back of queue, in the end it was resolved positively- one of the main reason i am pushing for "new guidelines".  If this process is going to support us and Alamy let's work together, the UUQ form does not match either the agreement 16.7 nor Alamy's process. 

[meanderingemu]

5 hours ago, MandyD said:

Yes, anything with a watermark is obvious. I sent them the link and they said they would pass it on to the infringement team. 

 

curious was it the image download and uploaded with watermark, or a referral to Alamy's url which are everywhere and i just disregard as non-chasable? 

[MandyD]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

curious was it the image download and uploaded with watermark, or a referral to Alamy's url which are everywhere and i just disregard as non-chasable? 

multiple photos with watermarks

[meanderingemu]

9 minutes ago, MandyD said:

multiple photos with watermarks

 

thanks.  nice to know that Alamy is being proactive once notified.  

[M.Chapman]

5 hours ago, MandyD said:

multiple photos with watermarks

 

As meanderingemu asked - were copies of the images being hosted by the "infringing" website, or did the images simply link back to an Alamy URL? (Right click on the image and copy the URL). I see loads of the latter and reluctantly tend to regard them as free advertising, especially if the Alamy image ref is visible.

 

Mark

[MandyD]

8 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

 

As meanderingemu asked - were copies of the images being hosted by the "infringing" website, or did the images simply link back to an Alamy URL? (Right click on the image and copy the URL). I see loads of the latter and reluctantly tend to regard them as free advertising, especially if the Alamy image ref is visible.

 

Mark

multiple photos posted with watermarks

[sb photos]

5 hours ago, MandyD said:

multiple photos posted with watermarks

 

For the first time I've come across similar. Various websites displaying my e-scooter Alamy watermarked images, and not linked back to Alamy. The websites were all .ru Russian. I haven't reported as I assumed, especially during the current climate, that it would be near impossible to chase for payment.

[meanderingemu]

curious how do people interpret the following restriction in the current Alamy process:

 

• "We can’t chase unauthorised uses on your behalf if your image…Has been reproduced on another website as a direct copy of an original article which has a license."

 

 

 

how literal is "Direct"?  anyone successful chasing ones that have been altered?   Is a translation a "direct copy"? 

 

[Jansos]

I found an infringement recently, from 2017, reported it to Alamy and within 4 weeks had received a payment. Just a tiddler in terms of $ but the process was quick and efficient. No complaints.

 

My question is how can you quickly see if the image ID you suspect to have been infringed has appeared as one of your genuine sales? At the moment I'm trawling back through though 000s of pics to see if there has been a legitimate sale historically. There must be an easier way, surely? I can't seem to search on image ID and sales. Any help much appreciated.

[geogphotos]

38 minutes ago, Jansos said:

I found an infringement recently, from 2017, reported it to Alamy and within 4 weeks had received a payment. Just a tiddler in terms of $ but the process was quick and efficient. No complaints.

 

My question is how can you quickly see if the image ID you suspect to have been infringed has appeared as one of your genuine sales? At the moment I'm trawling back through though 000s of pics to see if there has been a legitimate sale historically. There must be an easier way, surely? I can't seem to search on image ID and sales. Any help much appreciated.

 

 

I maintain an 'All Sales' spreadsheet using my image refs and which agency made the sale.

 

Then further spreadsheets for each agency so that I can explore the details of use and territory.

 

Alamy is great because you can download the complete sales history at any time. 😃

 

But Alamy is not so great in that they don't supply the client name.  Having said that the licence details are very helpful in working out that it wasn't to some hotel or tree-surgeon or whatver...

Edited May 2, 2022 by geogphotos

[wiskerke]

55 minutes ago, Jansos said:

I found an infringement recently, from 2017, reported it to Alamy and within 4 weeks had received a payment. Just a tiddler in terms of $ but the process was quick and efficient. No complaints.

 

My question is how can you quickly see if the image ID you suspect to have been infringed has appeared as one of your genuine sales? At the moment I'm trawling back through though 000s of pics to see if there has been a legitimate sale historically. There must be an easier way, surely? I can't seem to search on image ID and sales. Any help much appreciated.

 

You did download your spreadsheet, right?

I keep a document with thumbnails of all images that have been licensed and their prices plus their total. And I rank them. But it doesn't count them.

Preferably I would merge the two, but have not found a good way to do so without ending up with a Gigabyte of spreadsheet. My document is 125 Megabyte, but my spreadsheet is a mere 0.24 Megabyte.

 

wim

 

edit: thumbnails images have

Edited May 2, 2022 by wiskerke