eBay

retromania123-7 · ‎26-08-2024

I am a long time regular buyer and occasional seller on Ebay and collect rare photographic postcard and photograph images with a particular interest in cinema and retail history. There is another seller who regularly rips off these sorts of images from other sellers listing photos where he is able to do so, eg where no sellers watermark or single preventative "Do Not Copy" marking or similar has been added to part of the listing photo(s) that would make it hard to illegally download, something I'm regularly imploring other sellers to do. As a collector for more than 25 years and on Ebay on and off for over 20, I normally know which images are available or widely available, and which are the very rare and previously unseen, or even in some cases unique ones. This other rogue and dishonest seller has illegally copied about a dozen or so very rare postcard images that I've purchased over the last two years or so, then adds them to his site of around 60,000 images and starts selling cheap, low grade copies for £3.25 a pop, including one card, a very rare London Budgen shop front from 1898, that I paid around £200 for. A few weekdays after I bought it, thus guy started selling his cheap copies of the same. It's become such a problem and Ebay have had numerous reports about his constant image piracy, but seen to do nothing about him. He's apparently also been reported for ripping off images off of Ebay for resale to the postcard traders association by a number of aggreaved sellers who's unmarked cards listed for sale on Ebay he rips off and then resells on the site - amusingly watermarking them himself to prevent other people ripping off his already ripped off images. What is ebays policy towards people like this, and what as a community can we do to stamp out this very unfair practise and, hopefully, rid the site of people Like this?

*vyolla* · ‎27-08-2024

@rigged_out wrote:

Perhaps tell eBay staff that. eBay have a video on their youtube channel explaining how to vero another seller for using your listing images. I think the OP should listen to eBay staff and let them make their own way

I'm failing to see what this has to do with VeRO (eBay's Verified Rights Owner programme).

The OP is not the verified rights owner of the images. In their opening post they state:

This other rogue and dishonest seller has illegally copied about a dozen or so very rare postcard images that I've purchased over the last two years or so, then adds them to his site of around 60,000 images and starts selling cheap, low grade copies for £3.25 a pop, including one card, a very rare London Budgen shop front from 1898, that I paid around £200 for. A few weekdays after I bought it, thus guy started selling his cheap copies of the same. It's become such a problem and Ebay have had numerous reports about his constant image piracy, but seen to do nothing about him. He's apparently also been reported for ripping off images off of Ebay for resale to the postcard traders association by a number of aggreaved sellers who's unmarked cards listed for sale on Ebay he rips off and then resells on the site - amusingly watermarking them himself to prevent other people ripping off his already ripped off images. What is ebays policy towards people like this, and what as a community can we do to stamp out this very unfair practise and, hopefully, rid the site of people Like this?

Whilst the other seller is being out of order, they are not doing anything reportable. They're making copies of the images featured in the OPs listings, which happen to be out of copyright postcards or photos and selling them off cheap. If people want to end up with cheap low grade copies of genuine postcards and photos then that would be down to them, I can't see how that's an issue?

Even if the OP had money to burn and wanted to test the legal water, they'd need proof, and for that they'd need a forensic IT report, which would be a pretty impossible task.

4_bathrooms · ‎27-08-2024

@rigged_out wrote:
You just need to publish your images on a different site to ebay (like your own or another platform) before your listing. Then when they get copied you issue a vero against that seller.

Correct; a process I have described previously. However, the copyright owner identified on the website needs to be a different legal entity to the eBay account holder. This prevents the "you have"s in the User Agreement (such as "any rights you have") causing the eBay account holder to forfeit their intellectual property rights.

Person Y is the named eBay account holder. They are effectively using Person X's images with permission.

Person Z copies Person Y's eBay listing; i.e. by clicking "Sell similar". Person X (the copyright holder) files a VeRO report giving the website URL showing the image and the copyright notice. Only Person X can do this, not Person Y.

However, I cannot find a video on any of eBay's Youtube channels that describes anything like the above process.

Give me ambiguity or give me something else.

4_bathrooms · ‎27-08-2024

@*vyolla* wrote:
Even if the OP had money to burn and wanted to test the legal water, they'd need proof, and for that they'd need a forensic IT report, which would be a pretty impossible task.

I'm starting to lose the point that was originally being argued to be honest.

If the argument is about the original copyright for the postcards themselves then only the copyright holder - or someone responsible for the copyright (such as a party or company named in a will) - can enforce their rights. If the copyright holder isn't willing to do so or the copyright has expired there's obviously nothing the OP can do.

Note that copyright lasts for 70 years following the author's death. It's actually quite conceivable someone could have taken a picture used in a 1898 postcard when they were in their 20s and lived beyond 1954 meaning the image would indeed still be subject to copyright. However, only the party holding the copyright could enforce it, not a third-party.

Give me ambiguity or give me something else.

*vyolla* · ‎27-08-2024

@4_bathrooms wrote:

However, only the party holding the copyright could enforce it, not a third-party.

Absolutely. It's a pretty impossible task to work out if a copyright like this is active, these things only come to light when somebody appears who claims to own it.

ett1954 · ‎27-08-2024

"It actually lasts 70 years from the author's death."

You are certainly correct on images created where the authorship is known however copyright laws are complex and cover other eventualities which in many cases are not always straightforward.

An example: In my instance the personal collection of photographs I have were in the main produced before 1945 during WW2. These were recovered at the time by various means (some undoubtedly dubious by today's standards) and have found there way to collectors due to their historical importance. They have not been published or made available to the public previously and their authorship is unknown due to the circumstances in which they were originally acquired. This then falls under a different area of copyright law concerning unknown authorship of photographs taken before 1945.

If they had been made public previously copyright expires 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first made available. In practice, this also means that anonymous photographs taken on or before 31 December 1944 will be out of copyright within the UK, unless they were published or made available to the public in some way before the end of 2015; if they were, then they remain in copyright for a further 70 years from the end of the year in which the work was first made available. By insisting on the credit in publications for photographs prior to the end of 2015 I have therefore, in theory, extended the copyright.

Unfortunately the vast majority of my collection have never been made public and under the rule copyright duration is 70 years after the end of the year in which the work was created. In other words they have not had any copyright protection since the end of 2015 and will no longer be entitled to it even if subsequently published.

I mention the above to highlight just how complex copyright laws are and how they are impacted by various factors.

rigged_out · ‎27-08-2024

The OP is talking about their most expensive and rare pictures that they've bought. Then they pretty much claim the other seller is copying the ebay photos to make 'cheap' copies. The only way he's got on eBay is to protect his ebay images and use the Vero system. Whilst watermarking isn't allowed there is still ways to protect even if the other seller is just cropping the image down to the minimum. Maybe put a spoiler in the image or something like ebay shop logo. Then publish it on their own domain random folder. Use that to Vero the other sellers. If the business is worth protecting then it doesn't cost much.

I really don't think the OP was ever trying to suggest they could go down some sort of rights to the image source or copyright or whatever. They just want to protect those ebay pics and ebay themselves have given advice on how to do that. I'm sure that's all the OP is asking for. In the video, after last year's open, the ebay lady was saying it's quite easy if you're a cross lister of clothes etc. You can use the published images, on an account you can prove is yours, on vinted/depop/etc and that will do for a vero.

theoddfellow · ‎01-10-2024

87 is one of worst, I once sold a postcard listing the wrong place, 3 months later the same image appeared with the same wrong listing

retromania123-7 · ‎21-02-2025

Why then, should anyone wanting a particular image, buy an original or vintage postcard or that image? Why not simply download it for free from the sellers listing photo(s)?

the-layer-laboratory · ‎21-02-2025

@retromania123-7 wrote:
Why then, should anyone wanting a particular image, buy an original or vintage postcard or that image? Why not simply download it for free from the sellers listing photo(s)?

In the UK, the rules for when a photograph enters the public domain depend on when it was created and who took the photograph. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Photographs Taken by a Named Photographer
Copyright lasts for the life of the photographer + 70 years after their death.
Example: If a photographer died in 1950, their photos enter the public domain in 2021.

2. Anonymous or Corporate-Owned Photographs
If the photographer is unknown, copyright lasts for 70 years from the date of publication (if published within 50 years of being taken).
If unpublished, it lasts for 70 years from the date the photo was taken.

3. Older Photographs (Pre-20th Century)
Any photograph taken before 1900 is almost certainly in the public domain.