Rant, Rave, Respect

I generally don’t like to write about negative stuff, because…well, there’s plenty of negative stuff out there. Just turn on the TV or glance at a newspaper and just about all you get is negative stuff.

But there’s been a string of events lately that I have to say something about. I need to blow some steam.

This is a graphic that I lifted from a site where a person named Rayven Collins, who lives in Clarksville Tennessee in the US, showcases some of her paintings.

stolen image

The image is/ was also on many other sites where Ms Collins has posted it. On some of those sites, she is even offering the image for sale, such as in this screenshot, taken from a site called imagekind:

pirated image

Ms Collins is selling the image on the site for US$11.39, or $92.48 framed.

The thing is…it’s not her image. It’s a direct copy of a photo taken by my friend and mentor Carl Roessler. In fact, the image is on the first page of his website. (Note: She’s supposed to take the image down, so it may not be there for much longer.)

When a person helping Carl contacted Ms Collins to ask her to remove the image from her sites, here’s the…let’s just say impolite…email that Ms Collins sent Carl (typos and all):

“I just want to say that you disappoint me as an artist. Most photographers would be honored that their work was used as a reference and instead you make yourself look like an asshole and have my drawing removed from imagekind and zazzle.

Your great white shark photograph has to me been considered as nothing more than a stock photograph. I see it everywhere with your name no where to be seen. It’s been used as album covers for local bands with your name no where in place because it is a stock photograph.

Just wanted to say you should be ashamed for your selfishness. I’m not even sure if you even took the photograph yourself. If I have the wrong “photographer” then I do apologize and please disregard this message.

By the way, it doesn’t take any talent to click a button but skill to duplicate nature by hand. Granted it was a talent to have took the photograph and not be eaten but someone with no artistic skill could and have performed what u did.

It is my fault for not gaining your permission to begin with but like I said I thought is was a stock photograph and am still convinced it still is. that is all.”

So wow. She attacks, retreats, attacks, retreats…in an incoherent flood of verbal diarrhea…all basically to say that she feels she has the right to use his image without his consent because she has unilaterally decided that it is a stock photograph (ignoring for the moment that people pay for stock photographs)…by which she means “free for me to use as I please because I’m the center of the universe”.

I especially love: “it doesn’t take any talent to click a button”, followed by a self-congratulatory statement suggesting that her copying Carl’s image line-for-line required much more skill than actually taking the photograph. (…so this is a novel argument…”Plagiarism requires more skill than photography!” Uhuh. And people think the education system is f*cked up.)

I certainly won’t be surprised if Ms Collins sends me an equally egotistical, vitriolic, incoherent polemic if she sees this.

Then, there’s one of my own recent experiences. One particular blog post I put up recently got highlighted on a number of social networking sites like StumbleUpon, Digg, Reddit and others…resulting in something on the order of 50,000+ views so far, along with lots of contacts from ad agencies, print publications, divers and others.

I didn’t expect this, as I literally wrote the post on a whim in order to procrastinate packing for Izu, but of course, I’m delighted that so many people have seen and commented on it.

A lot of people linked to my post. Some copied the photo and/ or text and linked. Some…well, just took the photo and/ or text.

Take this, for example:

no credit given

This is from a blog written by a woman named Sara Pulver, who, coincidentally, is also an artist.

Now, Sara highlights my image and text in a positive manner, so that’s a good thing. But notice the part I underlined in red: “Cannot find the name of who wrote this”.

Really? Really? You mean the “© Tony Wu | www.tonywublog.com” plastered on the image (in fact, just above your “Cannot find the name of who wrote this”) is too subtle for you? Seriously? For someone who is an artist (and therefore should appreciate the value of intellectual property), has a website, and has a blog…you’d think she’d recognise a URL slapped on the front of an image.

I could go on and on with more examples (like a guy who replied: “chill man, whatever turns you on dude” when I asked him politely to stop selling cards he printed using one of my images), but I feel the steam gradually subsiding, so I’d better wrap this up before I decide to be nice again.

The problem isn’t Rayven or Sara. Nope. It’s much bigger than just them.

The problem is respect…or more precisely, lack thereof.

It seems like people have a tendency to believe that just because they’re on the internet and hence not physically nearby or easily identifiable, they don’t need to have respect for others.

This underlying issue explains both Rayven’s and Sara’s lack of regret for stealing (yes…it’s stealing) intellectual property; it explains trolls on web forums who feel free to call people names, make unsubstantiated accusations, and otherwise just be nasty; it explains people who write to me with questions yet never bother to say “thank you” when I send a detailed reply…it explains all this and more.

At the risk of sounding like an old fuddy duddy…it doesn’t matter if you’re on the internet. You should treat everyone just like you would treat them in person (if you’re an ass in real life, well…not much we can do about that, is there?) and just like you want to be treated.

Of course, not everyone is like this. Some people have sufficient courtesy to write and ask whether it’s ok to use a photo or not…like Montana Black, another artist who did actually write to me to ask for permission to use a photo. I happily agreed to her request, so she got her whale model, and I got a very nice painting from Montana. Everyone’s happy. See how easy it is?

And yes. I realise that things are lot faster and looser on the internet than in the old days…say like three years ago…when print dominated. I’m ok with that. But at least acknowledge your sources, have the decency to ask for permission, get facts before opening your big mouth, and give credit where credit is due.

The internet has changed a lot of things. But some things should always remain the same.

Ok. Rant over. Back to more productive things.

Tags: , ,

  • http://matthew-oldfield-photography.com Matthew Oldfield

    Above and beyond the quite incredible rudeness of her email, I think it also highlights misconceptions about stock photography in general. She said she thought “the photo was nothing more than a stock photograph” – ie perhaps suggesting that it is free and she has the right to use it anyway. The term ‘Stock’ is misunderstood by the general public – seems to be synonymous with ‘use it forever and screw the photographer.’

  • http://matthew-oldfield-photography.com Matthew Oldfield

    Above and beyond the quite incredible rudeness of her email, I think it also highlights misconceptions about stock photography in general. She said she thought “the photo was nothing more than a stock photograph” – ie perhaps suggesting that it is free and she has the right to use it anyway. The term ‘Stock’ is misunderstood by the general public – seems to be synonymous with ‘use it forever and screw the photographer.’

  • http://www.deichmann-photo.com Gunther Deichmann

    Hi Tony,
    after reading the article the second time it really got me going! I am actually going mad…Tony, you know me well, I don’t beat around the Bush but I like to beat this women over the head with a big stick! The other one is not much better…
    These painters getting paid and we done all the hard work for them, they not painters… they are Cheap Copy Cats!
    They call them self artists/painter or what ever then having the nerve to say it is only pressing the button. I bet ya if she had been diving confronting this shark she would have shit in her pants.
    Tony, you have summed it up pretty well in your article and let me quote your favorite saying again “The lack of Education” and respect! Asking for permission is asking for to much today! Very Sad. Cashing in on someones work is already bad but making those statements, well I think she needs to have her Lame Brain examined.
    I can go on forever but leave it with my good old OZ slang….. sorry not enough space to fit it all!
    GD

  • http://www.deichmann-photo.com Gunther Deichmann

    Hi Tony,
    after reading the article the second time it really got me going! I am actually going mad…Tony, you know me well, I don’t beat around the Bush but I like to beat this women over the head with a big stick! The other one is not much better…
    These painters getting paid and we done all the hard work for them, they not painters… they are Cheap Copy Cats!
    They call them self artists/painter or what ever then having the nerve to say it is only pressing the button. I bet ya if she had been diving confronting this shark she would have shit in her pants.
    Tony, you have summed it up pretty well in your article and let me quote your favorite saying again “The lack of Education” and respect! Asking for permission is asking for to much today! Very Sad. Cashing in on someones work is already bad but making those statements, well I think she needs to have her Lame Brain examined.
    I can go on forever but leave it with my good old OZ slang….. sorry not enough space to fit it all!
    GD

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    Hi Matt: Yup agreed. But even deeper than the lack of understanding of what the term stock photography means, is just a simple lack of respect.

    Gunther: Hah hah! I can just picture you. The thing is, these specific people are just the symptom. There’s something wrong with our societies in general, as these people reflect the (lack of) ethics and sense of responsibility that permeate modern societies.

    I don’t believe these people are the exception, unfortunately. They’re probably more the norm, albeit at the rude end of the norm in the case of Rayven.

    And worse still…businesses and major media entities are known to do the same thing when they think no one’s looking.

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    Hi Matt: Yup agreed. But even deeper than the lack of understanding of what the term stock photography means, is just a simple lack of respect.

    Gunther: Hah hah! I can just picture you. The thing is, these specific people are just the symptom. There’s something wrong with our societies in general, as these people reflect the (lack of) ethics and sense of responsibility that permeate modern societies.

    I don’t believe these people are the exception, unfortunately. They’re probably more the norm, albeit at the rude end of the norm in the case of Rayven.

    And worse still…businesses and major media entities are known to do the same thing when they think no one’s looking.

  • Cheryl Fan

    People who do not realise the importance of intellectual property will eventually see that if someone else took what they themselves created from scratch, and flogged it off the net. Although many IP laws protect artists and photographers, there are still certain loopholes to be wary of. I’m sure the very rude Ms. Collins is just being self-righteous and plain ignorant. Fancy calling herself an artist in this industry, when she doesn’t even comprehend intellectual property rights! Photographers are artists of the camera; taking advantage of a fellow artist and to retort as above is just disgraceful. Shame on her.

  • http://dive.cherylfan.com,http://thechrysallis.blogspot.com Cheryl Fan

    People who do not realise the importance of intellectual property will eventually see that if someone else took what they themselves created from scratch, and flogged it off the net. Although many IP laws protect artists and photographers, there are still certain loopholes to be wary of. I’m sure the very rude Ms. Collins is just being self-righteous and plain ignorant. Fancy calling herself an artist in this industry, when she doesn’t even comprehend intellectual property rights! Photographers are artists of the camera; taking advantage of a fellow artist and to retort as above is just disgraceful. Shame on her.

  • Rhys

    I think it would be appropriate to pop a reg in her mouth, a camera in her hand and chuck her off the back of boat into a slick of horsemeat and blood. Lets see the results of her “clicking the button”

  • Rhys

    I think it would be appropriate to pop a reg in her mouth, a camera in her hand and chuck her off the back of boat into a slick of horsemeat and blood. Lets see the results of her “clicking the button”

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    Cheryl: Sadly, I have a feeling some people would never get it. If someone doesn’t actually think it’s wrong to steal, they won’t have any trouble doing it again. IP laws help, but usually there’s no point going after little fish like this.

    Rhys: Something would be definitely be clicking!

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    Cheryl: Sadly, I have a feeling some people would never get it. If someone doesn’t actually think it’s wrong to steal, they won’t have any trouble doing it again. IP laws help, but usually there’s no point going after little fish like this.

    Rhys: Something would be definitely be clicking!

  • http://www.arnekuilman.nl Arne Kuilman

    I have wondered for a long time who made that photo indeed and now I finally learn. That image was also used an advertising campaign for the original Apple Powerbook G3, so I am guessing Apple paid their royalties.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/arne/294356127/

  • http://www.arnekuilman.nl Arne Kuilman

    I have wondered for a long time who made that photo indeed and now I finally learn. That image was also used an advertising campaign for the original Apple Powerbook G3, so I am guessing Apple paid their royalties.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/arne/294356127/

  • Rayven Collins

    Hmm. Interesting. I’m glad I’ve made such an impact that so much time was spent writing a whole blog and writing every site that I have this drawing posted on as not being my own. The photograph I found online was by itself. Google shark and it’s right there. It was on some stock photography site. It was such a long time ago, I don’t even remember. There were no names attached to it. No copyrights anywhere to be seen. So for me, it seemed harmless and free to me. So I drew it. It’s better than the photograph. The print that I got for the reference was horrible and pixelated. There are minor alterations. It’s not like I scanned the photograph and sold it as my own. I spent a lot of hours on that drawing. Art is art. It’s art if you draw it from your own photograph and it’s art if you draw it from your own. To be so hoity toity and so politically correct as to label this as stealing just seems like a beg for attention. Really. You spent all this time blogging about this, writing redbubble or whoever to get my drawing removed. Shame on me? Shame on you!

  • Rayven Collins

    Hmm. Interesting. I’m glad I’ve made such an impact that so much time was spent writing a whole blog and writing every site that I have this drawing posted on as not being my own. The photograph I found online was by itself. Google shark and it’s right there. It was on some stock photography site. It was such a long time ago, I don’t even remember. There were no names attached to it. No copyrights anywhere to be seen. So for me, it seemed harmless and free to me. So I drew it. It’s better than the photograph. The print that I got for the reference was horrible and pixelated. There are minor alterations. It’s not like I scanned the photograph and sold it as my own. I spent a lot of hours on that drawing. Art is art. It’s art if you draw it from your own photograph and it’s art if you draw it from your own. To be so hoity toity and so politically correct as to label this as stealing just seems like a beg for attention. Really. You spent all this time blogging about this, writing redbubble or whoever to get my drawing removed. Shame on me? Shame on you!

  • Rayven Collins

    Another thing. By implying that I’m saying right clicking and saving the picture as more work than taking the photograph, I was not. DO NOT put words in my mouth but I can guarantee that I put more work in that drawing than whoever the hell the photographer is by clicking the photograph. I am a photographer as well and have just as much experience in both mediums. IT IS EASIER. That’s why there are more photographers than artists. :) Just to make myself clear. “Artists” as in people who draw or paint by hand. I’m not implying that photographers are not artists.

    Stock photography is free. There are many websites you can go to and “right click” away. If it doesn’t include a credit card, it’s free.

    So have fun ya old farts and typity away!

  • Rayven Collins

    Another thing. By implying that I’m saying right clicking and saving the picture as more work than taking the photograph, I was not. DO NOT put words in my mouth but I can guarantee that I put more work in that drawing than whoever the hell the photographer is by clicking the photograph. I am a photographer as well and have just as much experience in both mediums. IT IS EASIER. That’s why there are more photographers than artists. :) Just to make myself clear. “Artists” as in people who draw or paint by hand. I’m not implying that photographers are not artists.

    Stock photography is free. There are many websites you can go to and “right click” away. If it doesn’t include a credit card, it’s free.

    So have fun ya old farts and typity away!

  • Rayven Collins

    Look at how different it is. Honestly. This photograph is hideous! I’ve spent too much time already on this. Which is more attractive? You be the judge!

  • Rayven Collins
  • Rayven Collins

    Look at how different it is. Honestly. This photograph is hideous! I’ve spent too much time already on this. Which is more attractive? You be the judge!

  • Rayven Collins
  • http://matthew-oldfield-photography.com Matthew Oldfield

    For those who would like to see the quality of Ms Collins work, or perhaps write to redbubble, carbonmade, artwanted or myspace regarding copyright issues etc etc, here we go…
    http://www.redbubble.com/people/rayven
    http://rayvencollins.carbonmade.com/
    http://www.imagekind.com/MemberProfile.aspx?MID=332f7efb-4087-425f-b5e3-d09a1a4cb513
    http://www.artwanted.com/artist.cfm?artid=38952

  • http://matthew-oldfield-photography.com Matthew Oldfield

    For those who would like to see the quality of Ms Collins work, or perhaps write to redbubble, carbonmade, artwanted or myspace regarding copyright issues etc etc, here we go…
    http://www.redbubble.com/people/rayven
    http://rayvencollins.carbonmade.com/
    http://www.imagekind.com/MemberProfile.aspx?MID=332f7efb-4087-425f-b5e3-d09a1a4cb513
    http://www.artwanted.com/artist.cfm?artid=38952

  • http://www.liquidmocean.wordpress.com Mark Thorpe

    I think you are confusing Royalty Free Photography and Stock Photography. Stock, as it is meant in its correct term, is certainly not a free commodity. You say you are a photographer too? So if you made your living by taking photographs how would you feel if the ball was on the other foot and someone was exploiting your hard earned imagery for their own financial gain? There are many true artists out there who paint from their understanding of an animal. You on the other hand steal a photographic image, apply some badly administered photoshop filters and call it your own? Hardly a practice that warrants the use of the term Artist as your profession. Sleep well.

  • http://www.liquidmocean.wordpress.com Mark Thorpe

    I think you are confusing Royalty Free Photography and Stock Photography. Stock, as it is meant in its correct term, is certainly not a free commodity. You say you are a photographer too? So if you made your living by taking photographs how would you feel if the ball was on the other foot and someone was exploiting your hard earned imagery for their own financial gain? There are many true artists out there who paint from their understanding of an animal. You on the other hand steal a photographic image, apply some badly administered photoshop filters and call it your own? Hardly a practice that warrants the use of the term Artist as your profession. Sleep well.

  • http://www.deichmann-photo.com/ Gunther Deichmann

    My only comment now is…sue the bloody daylights out of her. This so called “Artist” need to see a Psychiatrist. Calling us old Farts I don’t believe this! With out the Photographers there would be no paintings in this case. You are so wrong my “Lady”. Do you know how much it cost to go diving, right equipment, traveling and not to mention the risk involved at times.
    You buy a brush chew and spit on it and then draw what others have created in the first place, get real madam!
    We try to make a living with Photography and stock images only for you to come along and take our bread and butter money away. You did not even apologized when this whole topic came about but instead put more fuel on the fire.
    I am truly disgusted.

  • http://www.deichmann-photo.com/ Gunther Deichmann

    My only comment now is…sue the bloody daylights out of her. This so called “Artist” need to see a Psychiatrist. Calling us old Farts I don’t believe this! With out the Photographers there would be no paintings in this case. You are so wrong my “Lady”. Do you know how much it cost to go diving, right equipment, traveling and not to mention the risk involved at times.
    You buy a brush chew and spit on it and then draw what others have created in the first place, get real madam!
    We try to make a living with Photography and stock images only for you to come along and take our bread and butter money away. You did not even apologized when this whole topic came about but instead put more fuel on the fire.
    I am truly disgusted.

  • http://www.nicolasrix.com Nicolas Rix

    Wow…
    Yeh. Utter disrespect. I myself am a freelance illustrator and use reference from stock photography websites. Just because you can right click and save – doesn’t mean it’s free of copyright.
    If in doubt and *you can’t find the owner*. If you didn’t create it to start with then just leave it alone.

    I have many a time thought about doing some homage to your whale photography Tony. But I would definitely think first and email you asking your consent, even if I used different colors or used a not realistic style. I still have the respect for you by being on this blog and commenting on something I feel is very very important.

    If and when I have used reference from books or magazines or the internet(google images), it has never ever ended up looking anything like the original and it’s usually to see how a lion looks or an expression, an old persons rinckles, a nice posture or perspective. That’s how you use reference…okay.

    Never to try and copy the image completely. I would never try to even sell an image I created of another person’s comic book character even though I love Hellboy, that would never be cool.

    And don’t be absurd by saying “it doesn’t take any talent to click a button” – because it does. Being at the right place at the right moment might have a lot to do with luck and the great equipment doesn’t hurt either, but I think it’s pretty difficult.

    There is a lot of talent that goes into this type of work.

    Tony; A Question and let the other photographer answer too:
    Of all the photographer, how many do you disregard and delete? and how many do you keep?

    Sometimes it’s okay to accept that you’ve done something wrong. The least you could do is apologise and ask that you could still sell the image and get consent from the original “click” artist to do so.

    For goodness sake… do not think that because it takes LONGER to copy and use your precious paint and time to recreate a photograph, makes you an ARTIST.

    Don’t pat yourself on the back thinking you’re right. You have an army of creative people on this planet that will drive this thing home and you’ll regret picking up a paintbrush to start.

    The first thing my art teacher taught us was not to steal other art. When this did happen, it was a major disgrace. And I agree with that. You might be inspired by other art or photography and that fine… or maybe you can just “click” and by chance take the exact same photograph…hah.

    So just give it a rest. Learn the lesson and move on. Nobody hates you (okay maybe some people will), but we just want you to do the right thing.

  • http://www.nicolasrix.com Nicolas Rix

    Wow…
    Yeh. Utter disrespect. I myself am a freelance illustrator and use reference from stock photography websites. Just because you can right click and save – doesn’t mean it’s free of copyright.
    If in doubt and *you can’t find the owner*. If you didn’t create it to start with then just leave it alone.

    I have many a time thought about doing some homage to your whale photography Tony. But I would definitely think first and email you asking your consent, even if I used different colors or used a not realistic style. I still have the respect for you by being on this blog and commenting on something I feel is very very important.

    If and when I have used reference from books or magazines or the internet(google images), it has never ever ended up looking anything like the original and it’s usually to see how a lion looks or an expression, an old persons rinckles, a nice posture or perspective. That’s how you use reference…okay.

    Never to try and copy the image completely. I would never try to even sell an image I created of another person’s comic book character even though I love Hellboy, that would never be cool.

    And don’t be absurd by saying “it doesn’t take any talent to click a button” – because it does. Being at the right place at the right moment might have a lot to do with luck and the great equipment doesn’t hurt either, but I think it’s pretty difficult.

    There is a lot of talent that goes into this type of work.

    Tony; A Question and let the other photographer answer too:
    Of all the photographer, how many do you disregard and delete? and how many do you keep?

    Sometimes it’s okay to accept that you’ve done something wrong. The least you could do is apologise and ask that you could still sell the image and get consent from the original “click” artist to do so.

    For goodness sake… do not think that because it takes LONGER to copy and use your precious paint and time to recreate a photograph, makes you an ARTIST.

    Don’t pat yourself on the back thinking you’re right. You have an army of creative people on this planet that will drive this thing home and you’ll regret picking up a paintbrush to start.

    The first thing my art teacher taught us was not to steal other art. When this did happen, it was a major disgrace. And I agree with that. You might be inspired by other art or photography and that fine… or maybe you can just “click” and by chance take the exact same photograph…hah.

    So just give it a rest. Learn the lesson and move on. Nobody hates you (okay maybe some people will), but we just want you to do the right thing.

  • Brian Mayes

    Having been caught red hand stealing another artists work, perhaps before coming on here and dazzling us with her intellect, she would have done well to remember what Abraham Lincoln said “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

  • Brian Mayes

    Having been caught red hand stealing another artists work, perhaps before coming on here and dazzling us with her intellect, she would have done well to remember what Abraham Lincoln said “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    For anyone who’s interested, here’s Rayven’s response to a query directed via redbubble.com, one of the sites where she’s posted her copy of Carl’s photo for sale.

    “I’ve checked the background material and in my view this work does not infringe copyright or trademark laws so please leave it on RedBubble. The drawing is original. The reference was a stock photograph and the photograph is hideous and at the time this was done I had a horrible copy of it that was pixelated and distorted. It is similar to the original but is not a replica. When I drew it, it did not have any copyrights attached to it. http://www.divexprt.com/index_pics/MaddenedAttackWb.jpg. Please do allow my drawing to remain on redbubble as I do value the comments that have been left on it and do not want them to be deleted.”

    In other words, she refuses to take the photo down. The site unfortunately agreed.

    There’s a discussion about this topic on this forum too, with some good perspective on the issues of copyright and derivative works:

    http://www.diveoz.com.au/discussion_forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21752

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    For anyone who’s interested, here’s Rayven’s response to a query directed via redbubble.com, one of the sites where she’s posted her copy of Carl’s photo for sale.

    “I’ve checked the background material and in my view this work does not infringe copyright or trademark laws so please leave it on RedBubble. The drawing is original. The reference was a stock photograph and the photograph is hideous and at the time this was done I had a horrible copy of it that was pixelated and distorted. It is similar to the original but is not a replica. When I drew it, it did not have any copyrights attached to it. http://www.divexprt.com/index_pics/MaddenedAttackWb.jpg. Please do allow my drawing to remain on redbubble as I do value the comments that have been left on it and do not want them to be deleted.”

    In other words, she refuses to take the photo down. The site unfortunately agreed.

    There’s a discussion about this topic on this forum too, with some good perspective on the issues of copyright and derivative works:

    http://www.diveoz.com.au/discussion_forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21752

  • Phil Mercurio

    Any idea if people can petition redbubble?
    I’d love to help!

  • Phil Mercurio

    Any idea if people can petition redbubble?
    I’d love to help!

  • http://www.domeport.com Ivan a.k.a Wishbone

    As I have learned from experience, the legal way is the best one possible.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/spearfish/3260330588/

    They disputed both the copyright infringement and my authorship.

    Since I’m in Bulgaria I’ve hired lawyers to get them in UK= I wouldn’t have bothered if they weren’t so arrogant to call me greedy when I offered them to settle the issue.

  • http://www.domeport.com Ivan a.k.a Wishbone

    As I have learned from experience, the legal way is the best one possible.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/spearfish/3260330588/

    They disputed both the copyright infringement and my authorship.

    Since I’m in Bulgaria I’ve hired lawyers to get them in UK= I wouldn’t have bothered if they weren’t so arrogant to call me greedy when I offered them to settle the issue.

  • Rayven Collins

    You guys are douches. At least the artist is nice! Do you guys have anything else better to do? Fuck you all!

  • Rayven Collins

    You guys are douches. At least the artist is nice! Do you guys have anything else better to do? Fuck you all!

  • JimC

    I’ve never hit a woman in my life, but in Ms. Collins’ case, I could make an exception.

  • JimC

    I’ve never hit a woman in my life, but in Ms. Collins’ case, I could make an exception.

  • http://www.domeport.com Ivan a.k.a Wishbone

    I am definitely considering Ms. Collins’offer!
    I share really nice memories with another artist! :D

  • http://www.domeport.com Ivan a.k.a Wishbone

    I am definitely considering Ms. Collins’offer!
    I share really nice memories with another artist! :D

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    For anyone who’s interested, what Rayven meant by: “At least the artist is nice!” is that Carl responded nicely when she sent him the email below on 15 July:

    “I do apologize Carl. I really thought it was a stock photograph. I felt like I picked out of everyone and just attacked. That whole blog pissed me off and you’ll see all the comments I made on it. I don’t know if you wrote it or if your lawyer wrote it. I’m actually still confused as who is who. But, anyways. The drawing is far different than the photograph. The photograph I have is this one http://www.divexprt.com/index_pics/MaddenedAttackWb.jpg. ”

    Followed by this on 17 July:

    “I understand and I’m sorry that you’ve had so many images stolen from you. I only used it because I liked it and I wanted to capture it myself. I’m sorry if people are using it against your will and hope that your mission goes accomplished. My drawings have been removed so you won’t have to worry about it anymore and I will no longer use your photographs.”

    Everything seemed great, almost as if there would be a positive conclusion to this unfortunate situation. However, as of 22:00 EST on 18 July, all of the links below were still active:

    http://www.behance.net/Gallery/Wildlife/215996

    http://www.redbubble.com/people/rayven/art/474229-4-great-white-shark

    http://www.imagekind.com/showartwork.aspx?IMID=049eb864-8df8-4ffa-ad24-60feb19da451

    http://www.artwanted.com/imageview.cfm?id=621349

    The fact that the images have actually not been taken down does seem somewhat difficult to reconcile with Rayven’s statement that: “My drawings have been removed so you won’t have to worry about it anymore and I will no longer use your photographs.”

  • http://www.tonywublog.com Tony

    For anyone who’s interested, what Rayven meant by: “At least the artist is nice!” is that Carl responded nicely when she sent him the email below on 15 July:

    “I do apologize Carl. I really thought it was a stock photograph. I felt like I picked out of everyone and just attacked. That whole blog pissed me off and you’ll see all the comments I made on it. I don’t know if you wrote it or if your lawyer wrote it. I’m actually still confused as who is who. But, anyways. The drawing is far different than the photograph. The photograph I have is this one http://www.divexprt.com/index_pics/MaddenedAttackWb.jpg. ”

    Followed by this on 17 July:

    “I understand and I’m sorry that you’ve had so many images stolen from you. I only used it because I liked it and I wanted to capture it myself. I’m sorry if people are using it against your will and hope that your mission goes accomplished. My drawings have been removed so you won’t have to worry about it anymore and I will no longer use your photographs.”

    Everything seemed great, almost as if there would be a positive conclusion to this unfortunate situation. However, as of 22:00 EST on 18 July, all of the links below were still active:

    http://www.behance.net/Gallery/Wildlife/215996

    http://www.redbubble.com/people/rayven/art/474229-4-great-white-shark

    http://www.imagekind.com/showartwork.aspx?IMID=049eb864-8df8-4ffa-ad24-60feb19da451

    http://www.artwanted.com/imageview.cfm?id=621349

    The fact that the images have actually not been taken down does seem somewhat difficult to reconcile with Rayven’s statement that: “My drawings have been removed so you won’t have to worry about it anymore and I will no longer use your photographs.”

  • Shaff

    I think she is a lunatic! A loony artist.

  • Shaff

    I think she is a lunatic! A loony artist.

  • http://ejlabs.net/ enje

    She is not artist.
    Without respect for other artist, how can be an artist?

  • http://ejlabs.net/ enje

    She is not artist.
    Without respect for other artist, how can be an artist?