Micro-Stock Photo Agency Prefers Converting Customers To Cracking Down On Infringers
from the sometimes-a-handshake-gets-better-results-than-a-savage-beating dept
In this bold era of copyright trolling, calmly (ir)rational takedown bots, baseless legal threats and ridiculous statutory damages, it's a true rarity to see a copyright holder deal with infringement, especially non-commercial infringement, with a reaction that's actually in line with the "crime" committed.As photo sharing increases, thanks to platforms like Pinterest and Tumblr, the chances of infringement increase. Paidcontent has the details on a micro-stock agency that's treating infringers as potential customers, rather than criminals.
Unlike other image owners, Dreamstime does not sic lawyers on people who like its photos. Instead the company, which claims to have more than 5 million users, responds by sending them a notice to take the image down or else to buy a license at the going rate which can be as low as $8.When you give infringers a logical option (take down the photo or pay a fee), most will take down the photo. If you give them the chance to license the photo for a reasonable rate, you should be able to find a few takers. The most important part of this scenario is that Dreamstime gives infringers an option, something most copyright holders are unwilling to do. Compare Dreamstime's method to those of other copyright holders.
According to CEO Serban Enache, this approach actually leads to better business.
“We want to respond to copyrighted images but we want to do it in a different, non-heavy-handed way,” said Enache in a recent phone interview. “This is very successful way of turning unauthorized users into customers. Once they learn of the license, they often obtain larger licenses.”
As photos spread across the internet, bands of lawyers are springing up who offer themselves as hired-gun enforcers to image owners. When they find a target, they squeeze them for thousands of dollars and take a cut of the loot.These copyright holders are willing to imagine that a hobby blog's use of an image is somehow depriving them of thousands of dollars. Because of this irrational (but self-interested) logic, the "problem" is treated with utmost severity, resulting in demands for prohibitively expensive licensing fees.
Major image owners like Getty possess image recognition software that lets them quickly detect unauthorized use of their images. The legal settlements they collect have become a major source of revenue.
Not only does Dreamstime request reasonable license fees, but it doesn't waste time with the DMCA process. A DMCA takedown notice almost always results in the infringing content being removed, but does nothing to help the photographers earn any income. It's hard to earn money by shooting first and asking questions later. Instead, the infringer is approached directly and honestly, rather than threatened with the possibility of legal action and thousands of dollars in statutory damages. Perhaps if more copyright holders approached casual infringement this way, they might see an uptick in income, rather than alienating another set of potential customers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: converting, copyright, customers, infringement, stock photos
Companies: dreamstime
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Viable business model
So where are all the spam emails from Dewey, Cheetam, and Howe? We should be inundated with settlement letters that state they know we are infringing and there is a new statutory damages clause for non-commercial infringement. Pay a fine of $1 per infringement or $100, whichever is lower.
btw I claim the patent on this business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Viable business model
The fact that this money-grab only really works short term is apparently completely lost on them, as while you may be able to score a couple hundred out of a person with a pay-up or lawyer up threat, odds are they aren't going to want to have anything to do with you and those you represent in any way in the future.
Compare that to the company talked about in the article, which I imagine will have plenty of repeat customers as people are offered a nice reasonable fee from the company, and are likely to want to do business with them in the future, making for an ever increasing customer base, and therefor better long term profits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Doesn't that come under the market heading of playing dirty ? 8)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heh a DVD shoots from 18$ to 150,000$ which they use as a threat to get 5-10K the second it's copied.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hate copyright. A lot. I would like to write for this blog. Can someone contact me about this? I believe that anything that can be digitized deserves to be mine. Thank you.
Including the zeros and ones that make up your bank balance. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
However long it was, it wasn't long enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But what about the lawyers?
This kind of activity must be stopped. It is already costing the US economy billions of dollars. Anyone who does not file lawsuits when they find copyright infringement should be stopped.
Oh, and Google should be taxed for this activity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How can you demand that these Artists should have to work so much!? It's like you're telling them they need to hold down a job or something...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.dreamstime.com/
(funny, the link to the article lacks a link too)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Asking? It'll never work.
You're serious? Hah, it will never work. If you treat people with respect you will get trod on, and be pissed all over your dead desecrated corpse by these people. A firm hand is what they need. Tough love with the iron fist. Like in the good old days.
[/s]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Length of Royalty?
Now there are copies of your site on the wayback machine, and possible copies of that picture that were taken from your site. Do you continue to be responsible for payment?
While this seems a better model than the extortion/lawsuit model contrasted, a better model still would be no copyright at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Getty only track RM infringement and chase the offender for the amount they owe - that's the license they would have had to buy if they hadn't "borrowed it".
Russell Glenister CEO Pocketstock
[ link to this | view in chronology ]