Those who stole the photos...

[Anio]

Hi,

Some days ago i saw that : http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=povratnik

I sent 2 emails to the Brickshelf webmaster for him to delete MY photo in the folder of this disrespectful guy named povratnik

But the photos are still in the folder.

Moreover, it is not the first time that this stupid guy make such a thing.

Has anybody ever have this problem with his photos ?

[efferman]

the picture of the 8043 excavator is yours?

[Anio]

the picture of the 8043 excavator is yours?

8043, 8049, 8258, 8263, 8264, 8265, 8274, 8275, 8285, 8288, 8289, 8292, 8294, 8295, 8416, 8421, 8436, 8455 and 8466.

[efferman]

what a ******!

[Milan]

On another forum there was similar discussion about stealing photos on BS.

Two BS accounts were suspended due to stealing.

Rightful owners of the photos did just what you are doing now...writing to BS webmaster.

[Blakbird]

8043, 8049, 8258, 8263, 8264, 8265, 8274, 8275, 8285, 8288, 8289, 8292, 8294, 8295, 8416, 8421, 8436, 8455 and 8466.

Several of the other photos are stolen from Technicopedia:

8040, 8042, 8044, 8835, 8837, 8849, 8851, 8852.

[Anio]

Several of the other photos are stolen from Technicopedia:

8040, 8042, 8044, 8835, 8837, 8849, 8851, 8852.

So, this member has to be banned. :o

Blakbird, maybe you should send an email too.

[Bojan Pavsic]

He just put the 8043 on his BS account and wrote "on wishlist"... How can he put something with a pic on wishlist if he doesn't have it yet to make his own photos?

I'm not defending him, but geez... it's just a pic of a Lego set, it's not the blueprints for a Nasa Space Shuttle and he didn't even tried to claim it as his own.

[awesomebrick]

He just put the 8043 on his BS account and wrote "on wishlist"... How can he put something with a pic on wishlist if he doesn't have it yet to make his own photos?

I'm not defending him, but geez... it's just a pic of a Lego set, it's not the blueprints for a Nasa Space Shuttle and he didn't even tried to claim it as his own.

I agree with Bojan Pavsic, I hate it when poeple steal images of MOCs and stuff but I don't see whats so wrong about taking pictures of a LEGO set that he doesn't even own so he can make a wishlist, Thats like accusing BrickSet of stealing images from S@H

But of course thats just my opinion and I don't mean to start a flame war.

awesomebrick

[TechnicJuan]

What exactly did he "steal"?

Those all look like actual sets to me. Is there a MOC in one of them that he is passing off as his own model? Or do you mean that the photos were actually yours and he is using them for his wishlist? I would say that he is "Borrowing" them.

This is pretty fussy over nothing.

[Enilder]

He just put the 8043 on his BS account and wrote "on wishlist"... How can he put something with a pic on wishlist if he doesn't have it yet to make his own photos?

I'm not defending him, but geez... it's just a pic of a Lego set, it's not the blueprints for a Nasa Space Shuttle and he didn't even tried to claim it as his own.

My thoughts as well. It's on his wish list and he isn't using that to make money or anything. It will be great if he can give credits to owners but I don't see a reason why he should be banned.

Also, it should be your responsibility to watermark images that you post. This becomes a completely different story if he simply took off the original watermark and post it as if it's his own creations.

My 2 cents.

[TechnicJuan]

On a side note, it's not like brickshelf has e-mail addresses available for people to "ask" others if they can use their pictures.

[Blakbird]

On a side note, it's not like brickshelf has e-mail addresses available for people to "ask" others if they can use their pictures.

First, I didn't start the thread and don't necessarily think this is that big of a deal, it is just irksome to find my work posted somewhere else under someone else's name without me listed. More irritating to me is that the images which are mine did NOT come from Brickshelf, they were taken directly from my Technicopedia site and then posted to Brickshelf under his name. I think it would be perfectly reasonable for this fellow to maintain a wish list on his own computer using these images, but Brickshelf is a way of sharing your images with the world.

A more bothersome one I had recently is that someone had a website filled with images from Technicopedia and not only were they not credited or linked to me, he didn't even host them on his own site, he was pulling them all from mine. So each month, about half of my bandwidth was this other guy's site who was using my pictures and my bandwidth without my permission. It was from another country so there was nothing I could do about it. I guess I could have moved the files and broken all of his links, but that would have been a lot of work.

Edited June 8, 2010 by Blakbird

[Anio]

He just put the 8043 on his BS account and wrote "on wishlist"... How can he put something with a pic on wishlist if he doesn't have it yet to make his own photos?

Well. That something I can understand.

But for the 18 other models (and even 26 if I take Blakbird's photo into consideration) ? O_o

In this case, this guys is definitely using the pics he finds on the Internet because he is too lazy to take is own photos.

So, in the description it would have been nice to credit the Technicopedia and SeTechnic.

[Bojan Pavsic]

Ok, i checked out "Technicopedia". Very nice website with lots of info. But i'm sorry, i couldn't find ANY disclaimer where it said "You are not permited to copy the images". Not that anyone reads them anyways.

If i take my wallet, camera and notebook and leave them somewhere in town, i pretty much doubt, they will be there the next day. It's the same with internet. Once you put something on, it's public. The only thing you can do is watermark your pictures (which is a simple batch process).

I know you put a lot of work into Technicopedia. So like Enilder already said, watermark the pictures and i guess u'll sleep better. (and this is not flaming, just advice, because i see reasonable replies in your posts)

Well, i can try contacting him and tell him to credit you guys in the descriptions. Will that calm everyone down?

Edited June 8, 2010 by Bojan Pavsic

[Siegfried]

That stuff only bothers me if they are using my bandwidth. In those cases I change the image to something completely different! MOCs however are a different story, and that's happened to me before.

It was from another country so there was nothing I could do about it.

In those cases I'd ban the linking site as a referrer.

[mahjqa]

Which is why I always put some kind of (small, inobtrusive) watermark on my pictures.

[AndroTech]

This is my public apology to the Anio (SeTechnic) and Blakbird (Technicopedia), for publishing their pictures on my BrickShelf gallery.

There was no copyright warnings, so i download the pictures of the sets I own, and publish one picture of each model.

Sorry once again.

Regards, Andrej from Slovenija

[Blakbird]

This is my public apology to the Anio (SeTechnic) and Blakbird (Technicopedia), for publishing their pictures on my BrickShelf gallery.

There was no copyright warnings, so i download the pictures of the sets I own, and publish one picture of each model.

Sorry once again.

Thank you very much Povratnik. No hard feelings. Based on the pictures, you have a very nice Technic collection and I hope you continue to enjoy it in the future.

[Meatman]

This is my public apology to the Anio (SeTechnic) and Blakbird (Technicopedia), for publishing their pictures on my BrickShelf gallery.

There was no copyright warnings, so i download the pictures of the sets I own, and publish one picture of each model.

Sorry once again.

Regards, Andrej from Slovenija

Very Classy.

And Blakbird, I can understand your frustration with people linking pictures directly from your website.

[Brickthus]

Yes, he's definitely lazy.

I think there are 3 levels:

1. Copying pictures of official sets. The only work that's copied from you is the photography.

2. Copying track plans or virtual designs. They've nicked your work but the design tool images are nicked from the tool author.

3. Copying MOC photos. That's outright plagiarism.

I had 2. done to me by some Japanese guy a while back, nicking track plans I'd done in Track Designer.

I think that one was sorted out when I emailed the Brickshelf moderator.

At a lower level, we all read stuff off the web and use ideas to make our own stuff. We tend not to declare the prior art very often, except where it's so obvious that someone might notice. There is still credit for integrating others' ideas to make a model that's better than the sum of the ideas.

I'm more careful now about putting my name on stuff, as well as the date if it's pioneering work, since there are some things in the community for which inventing the idea or way of doing things has some value e.g. a few years ago it was pneumatic logic, stopping cylinders in the middle, or helicopter rotors.

Some of the time my modelling style would be recognised anyway!

I tend not to bother watermarking my photos of sets, except where I've modified them or added value to the pictured model, since TLG did more work on the content than I did.

Mark

[Anio]

This is my public apology to the Anio (SeTechnic) and Blakbird (Technicopedia), for publishing their pictures on my BrickShelf gallery.

There was no copyright warnings, so i download the pictures of the sets I own, and publish one picture of each model.

Sorry once again.

Regards, Andrej from Slovenija

Thanks.

[TechnicJuan]

Yes, he's definitely lazy.

I think there are 3 levels:

1. Copying pictures of official sets. The only work that's copied from you is the photography.

2. Copying track plans or virtual designs. They've nicked your work but the design tool images are nicked from the tool author.

3. Copying MOC photos. That's outright plagiarism.

I had 2. done to me by some Japanese guy a while back, nicking track plans I'd done in Track Designer.

I think that one was sorted out when I emailed the Brickshelf moderator.

At a lower level, we all read stuff off the web and use ideas to make our own stuff. We tend not to declare the prior art very often, except where it's so obvious that someone might notice. There is still credit for integrating others' ideas to make a model that's better than the sum of the ideas.

I'm more careful now about putting my name on stuff, as well as the date if it's pioneering work, since there are some things in the community for which inventing the idea or way of doing things has some value e.g. a few years ago it was pneumatic logic, stopping cylinders in the middle, or helicopter rotors.

Some of the time my modelling style would be recognised anyway!

I tend not to bother watermarking my photos of sets, except where I've modified them or added value to the pictured model, since TLG did more work on the content than I did.

Mark

Nice response after the guy that used the pictures already made a public apology yesterday and deleted them.

You guys are worried about pictures of actual sets when people use other builder's designs on a daily basis and pass them off as their own without giving credit to the original designer. Some of you are browsing and posting on this very forum.

[Brickthus]

Nice response after the guy that used the pictures already made a public apology yesterday and deleted them.

My bad timing, sorry. I think I missed reading page 2 of the thread.

You guys are worried about pictures of actual sets when people use other builder's designs on a daily basis and pass them off as their own without giving credit to the original designer. Some of you are browsing and posting on this very forum.

That, of course, is a further stage of badness, similar to taking a photo of an official set and making money from it.

The worst cases in the community have been on LEGO Factory, where people have copied others' MOCs and passed them off as their own. At least TLG are aware of this problem.

It seems we have quite a few items to make a "community etiquette" guide, apologising quickly being rule no.1

Mark

[no_skill]

You guys are worried about pictures of actual sets when people use other builder's designs on a daily basis and pass them off as their own without giving credit to the original designer.

So, where does one draw the line?

For instance, several months ago someone posted a MOD of an expanded Brickbeards Bounty that was very similar in concept and in several specifics to a project I was working on. This was purely out of hapenstance--I don't even remember the other builder's post (I did spend some time looking for it--I think the pics were tagged onto another topic). If I post my MOD (months later) and the other builder (or someone else) recognizes the similiarities, does that brand me a dirt-bag? Even though the similarities are coincidence? (Great minds have been known to think alike on occasion! )

Likewise, there was a recent thread about how to build a LEGO toilet. Lots of people sent in pics of their own concepts. Many of them were nearly identical. I don't for a minute think these guys were plagerizing each other; after all, there are only so many ways to build a toilet!

For guys like Mark who do super technical things, I'm sure it is easier to recognize when something is stolen. But for a weakling like me trying to build a tiolet or MOD a pirate ship and then share something I'm proud of with others, what rules do I follow?

I'm not tring to be inflammatory or nefarious; it's a sincere question. I don't want to be branded as scum if I post something that happens to have similarities to member X, Y, or Z. I lack the talent and resources of most of the forum's contributors, and things like this make me even more reluctant to post a MOC or a MOD. Where is the line?

Edited June 10, 2010 by no_skill