#21 (permalink)

I think it's much more difficult to sue when there are no damages.

I don't think the world photographers live in is that unique. But we do tend to get pretty hung up on "intellectual property."

With all due respect, and this comes from one photog to another, I don't think this will hold water in court. An analogy that springs to mind is if I got fired for always being late, and then sued everybody else on the road for causing me to loose my job. As you said, you're in a competitive field, and while you don't think Alexa ranking should be a competitive advantage, other people, including the ones with the purse strings, do. Notice that CNN's Crossfire didn't sue the Neilson rating system when they were canceled ... surely not because they were indifferent to the money.

First, congratulations on surviving an earthquake. I'm not trying to sound argumentative in my reply, but I really don't see much chance to prevail in court against Alexa, and I imagine you'd be in a better position if you spend the time talking to other potential clients vs lawyers. It's your choice how you take the advice, but the reason people on this forum are pointing to holes in your plan so you can take them into consideration and come to a more informed decision, whatever it happens to be.

But that's not a good metaphor to describe what Alexa is doing. Let's say instead you asked all your male friends if they had been to your girlfriend's house. What Alexa is doing is somewhere in the middle, but a lot closer to the second description. They're not conducting surveillance on web sites; they're watching what their own users ( that would be your male friends ) do on the internet, with those peoples' prior agreement.

You really don't have anything to apologize to anyone over. No one here is in love with Alexa, we're just trying to provide a different perspective. And as a fellow cameraman, someone who's found my own images being used illegally, I know this can be an emotional matter, with righteous indignation.

__________________
The Pacific Northwest | Escheresque | Avery Point, Connecticut

#22 (permalink)

Michel I wanted to echo a little of what Forrest said about there not being any need to apologize at all. I know I've taken no offense at anything and I hope I haven't caused any either.

I think this is an interesting discussion as someone who's involved, but I also think it will prove interesting and informative to people reading.

I'm not a photographer though I do have photographers as clients and they're very conscious of having images stolen and reused. I haven't had my own images taken, but there are several sites that have scraped my content and are passing it off as their own. It's frustrating and it made me angry to see it.

But I've come to learn that trying to fight it will end up costing me more than not fighting it. What I do instead is make sure my pages link to my other pages. Now is someone lifts my content I at least get some links out of it and perhaps a few more people visit my site through search engines because of it.

I think in your case Alexa is going to win any case. I know it's hard to lose a client because of it, but I don't see how they've really done anything wrong. They aren't measuring your stats, but rather users of their toolbar. What I would do is install the toolbar yourself or the search status extension for Firefox if you use Firefox and then visit your site. Have your friends do the same. Tell everyone you know to install the toolbar and have them visit. If you do you'll probably end up with a higher Alexa ranking than your competitor. Look at it as a competitive advantage or disadvantage.

Also post a link to your site in your forum signature. I'd bet that most everyone here uses either the toolbar or the extension. As we visit your site we'll help raise Alexa too.

Another idea would be to write tutorials for your site. The well known problem with Alexa is that it's mostly SEOs and webmasters who have it installed so the rankings skew in favor of sites we like. Add some tech related content and you'll find more of your visitors will have the toolbar installed.

Should you have to do any of the above? No. In an ideal world you wouldn't, but I think what we're all saying is that working to increase your own Alexa ranking will be easier and cause less problems than trying to fight.

As far as Archive.org is concerned yeah it sucks that they have your images, but in all honesty the majority of internet users have no clue that site exists. Your images though will also end up in Google, Yahoo, MSN, and Ask image search.

It might not seem fair, but it's part of life online. The courts have been backing the search engines in this issue. The overwhelming majority want to have those images in search results and sites like Archive.org.

If you're concerned with others using those images add a watermark to the images you use online. That should be enough to discourage others from reusing them.

It might not be fair, but I think it's easier than trying to fight thngs.

__________________
l Search Engine Friendly Web Design | Van SEO Design
l Tips On Marketing, SEO, Design, and Development | TheVanBlog
l Custom WordPress Themes

#23 (permalink)

I may sound passionate about this issue but I have never once thought anyone in this thread was trying to argue or flame. If you note that once or twice I said similar in my posts. But just as a side note I think it's a sad commentary on today's society that when people have a debate we are forced to post disclaimers about our intentions.

Google is very good and very concious about how they go about everything. I had a talk with my lawyer and one thing he made clear about this...

Google is NOT setting case precident laws.
Google is setting precident on the Internet!

As far as Archive.org not being part of Alexa. I had some dialogue with Damien yesterday and mentioned an incident where someone purchase several DVDs of my films, then proceeded to duplicate and distribute them.

I not only went after him...
But the credit card company he used, the postal service that mailed my dvd, UPS for bringing my DVDS to the stores and even several of the stores.
When it comes to litigation, you sue as many people with money involved in the action. My case with the actual thief went to court but a lot of these people settled out of court.

Old lawyer's philosophy... Sue everyone part of the action you can. Just make sure they have money.

Surveys conducted not on the property of the business owner are very legal. But handing out video cameras, so that people can walk into my business and record what is going in it and then later collecting the cassettes is not legal.

If there is malicious intent.... stalking by proxy is acknowledged in the courts.
If there is no malicious intent... we get into areas I have already described.

And unlike walmart and in the case of Archive.org...
If you business is photos or paintings and you owned a gallary...
And along comes some **** with a free cell phone camera and starts taking pictures of my stuff.
I don't care if he is giving away my photos, creating a free libary for future generations or printing up t-shirts.
You walk out with a copy of my stuff and you have effectively robbed me. Just as sure as a guy knocking over a 7-11.

This debate has been good because it in essence proves my point about the net. Dialogues like this is how things become neat, organized and eventually we get an envirioment that is more mathematic. When that happens profit margins become nicely chartable.

#24 (permalink)

I've glazed over the degree of difficulty. Granted some cases are going to be a hell of a lot harder than others. And sometimes it's pointless, like suing a homeless person for a Million dollars. Even if you win, what's the point and what did it end up costing you ?

As for the intellectual property...
It's worse than that with me. I have 8 people and their families that I take care of and put food on their table. These people have been loyal employees to me and when I hear them talk about their families....
Let's just say I like to go for the throat of anything that might harm or deters from what we do.

I can see the simularities...
But nielson is kind of grandfathered in. And if I owned a broadcast station I'm not certain I would want to sue them either. Off the top of my head I think it would do more harm. We could loose everything from actors to advertisers.

The politics are bad on my side of the entertainment industry corner and I'm small potatoes. And I remember my time in the L.A. industry. I don't even want to guess what it must be like for CNN.

Side note: It would be wonderful if someone could find a way to sue and stop the politics.

My lawyer gets paid if he works or not and for the next month or so we are processing footage. The Internet for me isn't a big piece of my time and it's my way to remain current on many things.

As for the profit vs time vs. etc etc.
At this point in time I'm only investigating my opitions.
I haven't filed a suit against anyone.... yet.
It is sad comentary but litigation can and often is a form or revenue for busincess. As of yesterday I learned that Alexa is Amazon and they have deep pockets.

The question now is there an approach I can take to profit from this infringement or grey zone. I don't necessarily want to go to court but perhaps I can build an argument strong enough that might make me more trouble than I am worth. IE: Give me something to go away.

I love talking to people that share my love of the click sound. However, when we get into heated topics or controversial ones...
In today's wonderful politically correct society we have to pause priodically to make sure no one is offended.

It is an interesting to note that I also found out that Alexa tracks via the Amazon cookie. Which doesn't surprise me because big business always diversifies everything. So if there is 1 source to achieve something they are going to want at least another 10 to make certain they get what they want.

Blocking these b*stards is like trying to keep the Borg from assimulating.

#25 (permalink)

To be honest i was wondering how long it would take you to come clean and admit that it isn't an injustice you are fighting against. It seems to me now that your "case" is nothing more than trying to get a slice of another companies profits even though they have done nothing wrong, Broken no law and you have in no way been damaged by their actions.

Here's some advice. Forget about Alexa, You don't have a leg to stand on. Try falling over in walmart or spilling McDonald's coffee over yourself, Those frivolous court cases are where the money is.

__________________

#26 (permalink)

It sounds like you're a still and video photographer. I'm not sure what type of gear and technique you use exactly, but as it seems you have more than one client, I'm guessing it's better than a flashlight and cardboard one-time-use camera from Walgreens. You might be a Luddite with 35 mm film, you might be using medium format, or some form of digital, probably higher end. In my case, I'm using a digital full frame SLR with quality somewhere between 645 and 6x7 slides. If somebody starts photographing my prints with a cell phone camera, I can be pretty sure he's not building a stock library to compete with Corbis. Nobody is going to want small, grainy photos shot through a plastic lens when the same image exists in quality.

Earlier you likened Alexa to somebody handing out video cameras to passers-by to gather intelligence for them. The problem with metaphors is they tend to blind you to the ways Alexa is unlike somebody handing out video cameras...

With all due respect, you couldn't be more wrong about this. I know somebody who robbed a 7-11 with an unloaded gun. He spent four years in prison. His victim may have developed post traumatic stress disorder. Seeing your images show up without your permission is upsetting, even infuriating, but you probably won't need to seek medical treatment from your doctor, and the people at Alexa probably won't spend much time worrying about being raped or stabbed by fellow inmates.

The US Supreme Court has decided that while actual theft and copyright infringement are both illegal, they're not at all the same thing. Much like jaywalking and murder. The justice writing the opinion wrote that using the word theft to describe copyright infringement for intellectual property is misleading and inflammatory.

Again, that's the danger with relying too much on analogy. I don't think a giant stretch like robbing 7-11 is the same as using images without permission, or counting the number of toolbar users who visit your site, will impress the jury. In all honesty, it sounds exaggerated and unreasonable. Bona fide damages will help your case, but emotional calls to see you as the victim probably won't.

__________________
The Pacific Northwest | Escheresque | Avery Point, Connecticut

#27 (permalink)

This is the nature of business and capitalisim.
It doesn't matter what happens, when it happens or why it happens.
If you aren't goint to evaluate everything from the perspective of getting something for your efforts...

Go work for a non-profit organization or some sort of benevolance.
It takes a lot of moxy to be a success and you're not going to get their by being wishy-washy.

Hey don't knock the pinhole camera. We used it last month for a 5 second special effect. As for cell phones.... Well I looked at one the other day and it promised 11 mega pixels. I don't know what your opinon is but these crappy hand held walkie talkies are getting better every day. Lets just say I get a irked thinking about them.

They created a special agent for the purpose gathering information.
They bundled it with features to make it attractable enough for people to want it.
In return they get downloads of data about their browsing habits and use that to create a database they can earn a profit off of.

SOOoooo.....
If I gave people a free camcorder. (something that is attractable and many want it.)
But the condition was they video tape where they shop and send me the cassettes....

It isn't all that different.

Well the point I was making is that it is still a theft.
If someone knocks over a 7-11 and they might be a violent thieft.
Or ilegally duplicate my DVDs.

In the end the common denominator is they're still a crook.


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

After several years of working for other people and as an independant. In 1999 I incorporated and started to produce my own stuff. And I won't lie or exagerate but I'm really small potatoes. We produce promotional videos, commercials and I like to tackle indie film projects whenever I can.

In 2001 I was convinced that the net was going to be the next big wave. But it has been anything including a roller coaster ride. Money was spent on everything from site creation to online stores and in the end it was very fustrating and I had tons of problems. Although it is still technically my business that pays for anything I do, it is really my pet projects.

Still the net taught be some valuable stuff.

1. I should have paid more attention in school when they talked about computers instead of looking at the girls.

2. The need for a zero tolerance policy on all forms of theft.

3. Having a good selection of diverse people and talents within an organisation. And this is really my only criticism of the net.

It is really a predominately techincal field. The average exploiter of the net understands the machine he is clicking on better than he understand contract law. And that is not a good thing...

Because what we get is big companies that wouldn't get away with certain things in the real world are setting precident in the virtual world. That cuts down on compettion and creates hell for the small guy.

#28 (permalink)

I don't know if a zero-tolerance policy on theft makes sense, even if it could be enforced. The Bible itself tells us you can steal grain from someone else's farm to feed your family, but only so much as you can fit in your hands, without a bucket. Don't misunderstand and think I'm trying to encourage theft, but do you remember the lethal car alarm in Robocop, that electrocutes a would-be thief? My point is you don't want to get carried away with the details and loose sight of the big picture.

This seems to be taking a lot of your time. Remember to factor that into your cost/benefit analysis.

Maybe it's because my background is as a programmer instead of taking pictures, but the internet isn't really that different from the rest of life. In fact, I think it's a wonderful thing most people understand their computer better than contract law. How often in life does one have to deal with contract law? How often does one deal with a computer, in a situation demanding some level of competence? That's just proof our priorities are right, although it's a very bad thing for people who don't understand computers well.

By now I'm a pariah. But I think I can guess at what our friend Forrest meant about cell phones. You sound like a high end kind of guy. Maybe you sell your photos for $1,000. I don't know. But if someone is going to buy a $3 bootleg copy of your photo, they probably wouldn't have bought the real thing in the first place. My wife spends a lot of her disposable income buying DVD movies when they come out, mostly foreign films, directors she likes to support, actually there's a whole list. A friend of both of ours borrows them from the library and copies them on his computer. Want to guess how many DVDs he's ever bought, not counting the blank ones? Is the MPAA actually losing any money because he copies them? No, because he'd never buy one in the first place. If he couldn't copy them, he'd just watch them when he borrows them, or at a friend's house, or on TV. If there was no way to see Shrek 2 for free, frankly, I don't think he would buy it.

Maybe that's not the point our friend was trying to make, but it's what I read into it. All this suggests that stealing isn't really the most accurate way to talk about what's going on. I mean, creative types should have rights to control their creations, but going against a person's wishes is really a different thing from stealing from them. If I steal your car, you loose out because you don't have your car anymore. If I copy your DVD, you might loose a potential buyer for that disc, or I might be a collector who would never watch it anyway.

Of course all of this is really more of a philosophical rant, and doesn't involve Alexa in the least.

__________________
4 ways to improve the lives of the "bottom billion"

"HEY YOU KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!" -John McCain

#29 (permalink)

I do work for a non-profit organization and i work for nothing.
I think you are under the impression that "success" and "greed" are the same thing.

Yeah, That is exactly what they have done. So what? The users still agreed to the EULA, It's it's perfectly legal and nothing to do with you.

No. The point you consistantly and spectacularly fail to grasp is that it is not theft.

__________________

#30 (permalink)

There is personal success...
Then there is business success...

And if you're in business to make profit.
Then you're going to have to keep that goal insight and work towards it.

My intent purpose in this dialogue is to not to inflame, insult or offend anyone.

I am also not really looking for a debate about issues of if something "does" or "does not" give a humanbeing a sense of self-fulfilment.

I don't believe at all that you're giving justifications for theft. All of what you have said is valid but we are starting to get into areas that are best left for pastors, priests and other moral leaders. Unless you would rather I start translating this into hebrew, I'm just going to say that Amazon is rich enough that it doesn't have steal.

It really isn't costing me any real time. To be honest, this forum has cost me the most time on the issue than the issue itself. If you look at my posting habits... I go in waves and I will go months without a single post. I post from my office and this corresponds with times that I am waiting for something or other to finish or happen.

It is and it isn't.
My dialogue happens every single with thousands of people and corporations. 99% of it the general public never hears about and even if they did, they majority wouldn't fully understand the issues or procedures involved. (IE. So and so said it was ok to do that. OR I read/heard/watched something and it said it was ok. ) So yes, in a sense it is just like the real world.

When you're dealing with rights and legalities...
Things tend to get complicted very fast and the average person is not interested in reading a 200 page synopsis about how "John Doe reached an agreement with Company X."

Add money into the equation and you get a situation of what is "Ilegal or infringement" might necesairly be so.
And what is "Legal or within an entities rights" might equally not necessarily be so.
Complicated as all heck because everyone wants to some how walk away with some sort of benefit.