Jeff the marmot

I've seen posts on an Isuzu forum where this guy is illegally using someone else's picture to sell his product at eBay. So it's a good assumption that this pic of a 4Runner from the same seller is also being used illegally. Whose pic is this? That person needs to tell eBay and the seller so that eBay will kill the sale. Looks like he has a few sales going.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...ayphotohosting

BTW, I have nothing to do with this Ebay listing. I'm just posting the link so someone can figure out where the pic is from.

kernel

I think the owner's name is Sherri. From Hawaii?. I've seen it on 4x4wire and Cardomain.

yellowspeedracer

correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think he's doing anything 'illegal.' maybe unethical and/or discourteous if he didn't ask permission to use the picture but if he just jacked it from the internet then i don't think it's illegal.....?

Jeff the marmot

Kernel - thanks for the tip. That's definitely Sherri's. I just located her web site: http://www.cardomain.com/id/sherri_girl
I'll send her a PM.

Yes, it's illegal to repost someone else's pic from another web site without their permission.

86toyota

http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/236023

opps too late

4Peanut

Now that we've got that figured out, what about the product this guy is selling? Is it snakeoil, or is there some truth here?

lee

no truth, wont work.

and it is NOT illegal to do that. in other words, he cant be arrested or sued for it.

its a public picture, and nowhere is it stated that the pic cannot be used.

Brendan

i know the pain first hand

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...category=33553

yellowspeedracer

here's the same topic...i was searching to see if i could find out if it's illegal or not.

https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...res+permission

jtm994

I've seen it on 4x4wire and Cardomain.

bike4miles

Yeap, that's Sherries ride. It's the most well know 4runner on Cardomain.

Lew

Lee, what is your source of information on this? As a part-time professional photographer, I'm somewhat familiar with US copyright law. Based on my understanding of such, your statements are incorrect.

The artist/author automatically has copyright the moment he/she creates the work. No registration required, no copyright notice required. Although those things do provide the ability to gain additional statutory damages, they are not required.

Publicly displaying a copyrighted work does not place that work in the public domain. No copyright or usage restrictions notice(s) required, although those can help clarify that the offender had to have known he/she was violating copyright.

Nobody will get arrested for copyright violation since it is not a criminal offense. i.e. the police won't care.

A civil suit would still be possible but without the image being registered @ the Copyright Office I believe damages are limited. Even in this instance they wouldn't amount to much.

In the end, unauthorized use of another person's image(s) *is* in violation of copyright law and unethical to boot.

sherri_girl

yes that 4Runner is mine. Thanks for keeping an eye out everyone. I have written to the seller and ask that the photo be removed.

Here is some information provided to me by a friend who also had his vehicle put on a website and was used to promote a product without his permission:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#102
Definition #5 applies to images
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


§ 102. Subject matter of copyright: In general26

(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Works of authorship include the following categories:

(1) literary works;

(2) musical works, including any accompanying words;

(3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music;

(4) pantomimes and choreographic works;

(5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works;

(6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works;

(7) sound recordings; and

(8) architectural works.

(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use38

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

lee

yea, i spoke about this with some graphic designers i work with and they say the pursuit of any action would be more expensive than the compensation provided.

so i guess i meant, its not illegal enough!

sherri_girl

need help. This is the email I got back from the seller:


HI I GOT YOUR FIRST 5 EMAILS I WILL NOT LIST ANYMORE WITH YOUR PIC.....I WILL USE ANOTHER AS SOON AS I LIST MORE....BUT THE LISTINGS THAT ARE ALREADY RUNNING ARE GOING TO HAVE THEM

Cant he/she edit the auctions pictures even though it's already running?

Scottiac

Not only can they, but ebay can do it for them (by killing the listing) if you inform them (ebay) of the situation.

Probably a better solution since they indicated flatly that they (the lister) will steal someone elses images next.

midiwall

Check here:
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/4-runner-performance-chips-47416/

And other previous versions of this question.

sherri_girl

I emailed Ebay last night but they have not responded yet. Should I just wait for Ebay to respond or go ahead and demand that the seller remove the pics immediately?

BruceTS

Do as others have done and edit your webpage and put some sort of other image in it's place, so when it shows up on his acution it's different. A very good example is make a graphic image of a snake and put "Snake Oil" on the image.

Yoda

That only works if the guy has linked to your web site pic. If he saved his own copy to his harddrive, and uploaded it, you couldn't "sabotage" his listing.