Copyright Trolling

1. 88

   WryLiltposted 10 years ago

   I saw this posted on Facebook and was curious if anyone else had come across similar info before?
   
   http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?s … =notify_me

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Patty Inglish, MSposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Yes. I ran across a blog owned by a person that first warned people of this copyright trolling and then did the trolling herself. There were complaints by victims posted on the blog and then the blog was taken down.

      replyreport
2. 76

   Kangaroo_Jaseposted 10 years ago

   No, first time I've heard about this. Thanks for the heads up Susannah.

   replyreport
3. 84

   psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

   How is it trolling to go after people who infringe your copyright?  I don't get it.  My pictures got used by wallpaper and tubing sites not because I allowed it, but because they took them.  I served DMCAs which were ignored because--like most pirate sites--they were on a foreign server.  But I went after the users too.  It is my work, and if I don't pursue *all* infringers I risk having it declared and orphaned work and placed in the public domain. And users of a service that pirates material, of any kind, do so at their own risk.
   
   To me a troll is someone with no leg to stand on, like a patent troll suing people for ridiculous broad patents.  If you genuinely own the material and it is genuine creative work, cherchez la troll?

   replyreport
   1. 40

      ChristinSposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      +1

      replyreport
   2. 85

      Marisa Wrightposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The article isn't very well written, IMO.
      
      It talks about people "trolling" (I think they mean trawling) the internet, looking for people who have stolen their images, and going after them.  Absolutely legitimate, if you ask me. 
      
      At the very end, it mentions people who pretend the own the copyright to images and send letters of demand.  They are the trolls.

      replyreport
4. 88

   WryLiltposted 10 years ago

   It's just a status, not an article. I'd like to see an article with more info though.
   
   I think it means more along the lines of "Here you can have this image for free use" without making it clear what that free use is limited to, then charging a huge bill for it.
   
   I guess it's a good reason to make sure we attribute properly so we can go back and refer to the original location of an image.
   
   There was a hubber awhile back who recommended using a "hidden capsule" with info on where we got our info/links, I've started doing that and I think it's a good method.

   replyreport