• Guest, Help The DPF Community Thrive - Join Our Donation Drive Today!

    We're launching a special DPF Donation Drive to ensure our beloved forum continues to flourish. Your support is vital in helping us cover essential server costs and keep our community running smoothly — This is more than just a donation; it's an investment in the future of our community.

    Join us in this crucial drive and let's ensure our forum remains a vibrant and dynamic place for everyone.

    Please visit the DPF Donation Drive Thread for details and instructions on how you can make your donation today!

Pinpics Proposes Ebay Photo Use Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pinpics Proposes Ebay Photo Use Ban
Situations change, that is true -which is why I stated that the newer photos wouldn't be an issue. That being said - condition has always been an issue -even 12 years ago. And, stock photos are still common place on Pinpics as well.

However, that being said, the photos were allowed to be used on Ebay, and given knowingly with that possibility. To change that policy now violates my own reasoning for contributing in the first place. I want everyone to profit from my photos, not just Pinpics.
 
Last edited:
I think that they're just covering their end considering what they're doing is actually supporting Ebay's stance against the mass usage of stock photos, mainly copyrighted commercial images, for auctions. That said, I don't see how the situation will change any as how will pinpics monitor the uploading of their images online and ebay when the auction company can't even monitor it themselves.
 
First off, before I reveal my feelings about this upcoming change, let me start off by saying that I am always a fan of original pictures on eBay. As much as people love to paint eBay as a negative place where bad people go to sell pins, the hard fact that beyond purchasing all your pins directly from Disney, it is the safest place to get your pins. The buyer protection offered by eBay and PayPal is the best around for buyers, they will *ALWAYS* side with the buyer in any dispute, real or imagined. There are way more protections for PayPal payments for eBay purchases vs other PayPal payments for items not off eBay. Non-eBay PayPal purchases have little protection for buyers.

As a result of this, I see no benefit for the buyers that protects them any more than what is already in place. In fact, I can see this as a negative for some. If sellers are using pictures of good pins and sending bad pins out instead, I think it will be easier for people to compare the pin they receive to the picture and realize something is not right. There are a lot of buyers that are not even aware of the existence of fake pins and even if there is an original picture showing something is fake, if its what they receive, it looks just like the picture and they still don't know any better. At least if it was different from the picture, they might be able to tell something is wrong.

If they are concerened about the bait and switch using pinpics pictures, this is the one and only area of the secondary market for either buying/selling/trading, where the buyer is 100% covered. If you trade for a bad pin in the park, who protects you there? If you trade for a bad pin online, who protects you? If you buy a bad off of this board, who protects you?

If they truly are concerned about people getting scammed with bait and switch, this is not where to start this.

I am also worried about where this will lead. What will be next? Will I be required to upload front and back pictures of any pin I'm wishing to trade before sending out a trade request via PinPics? After all, there is no protection for their members that they aren't trading for fake pins unlike buyers on eBay.

Also, it worries me that it has been said that Britt and Figgy were working with Lansam and about how often they talk and yet, today is the first they have heard of this very big change.

I am not even going to comment on Lansam's claim of ownership of the pictures PinPic's members allowed them to use as I feel they have no claim so I was trying to focus my post on the thinking behind the decision.

Does anyone here think this helps buyers beyond the protection coverage they already have?
 
I have also contributed many photos to pinpics, so I have a right to my opinion just as much as anyone here. When I buy from ebay, seeing an actual photo of the pin I am going to get is what sells me. Many times I see scratches and paint where it shouldn't be etc. Therefore, I do not buy the pin from this particular seller. It has saved me the time of getting the pin, only to have to return it, and possibly opening up a dispute. I love it when sellers post a picture of the exact pin you are getting, not the general picture of multiples of the same, because I use the zoom to see the condition of the pin.

That being said, I think it will make it better for us to have sellers upload a photo of the pins they are selling. JMHO.

(I am not in high school by any means, but do like to use different colors to post. I hope everyone can read this color.)
 
Having also been one to add photos to PinPics, I too feel I can have an opinion in this and I agree with this change. Not only is it good when an E-Bayer uses the actual picture of the pin they are selling, but how many of those images on PinPics are from Disney directly, whether ODPT.com, or the DSF flyers, etc. What happens if an E-Bayer use one of those images? Disney looks the other way on PinPics usage since it is using it for reference and trading, not for profit. If too many E-Bayers were doing this, and Disney felt it was a no-no, could they stop PinPics picture usage?

In terms of preventing it, that is easy. Code can be added to any site to prevent things like copying text or right clicking on a picture to save it.
 
Not again.. I thought we had managed to put this issue to bed.

1) While the idea is unenforcable - trying to stop the use of Pinpic's photos on Ebay aucitons will be a logistical nightmare, the idea does have merit. The intent is to make the seller post an actual image of what they are selling not the photo from the catalog. In theory, this would give a knowledgable buyer an opportunity to spot a counterfeit / scrapper pin before selling. There is nothing that would stop them from using a "standard" photo of a genuine pin that they took themselves to continue to fool bidders. But again that is not the issue here.

2) As someone who had Professionally sold photos, you DO NOT lose or give up your copyright by merely posting to a board irreguardless of what their terms might say. That is called a contract of adhesion and courts have previously ruled in favor of the photographers on this issue. However, you do not get to sue them, get paid or take back the photo having given them a LICENCE TO USE the photo within their system by posting it.

Bottom line - you may do with your own photos what you will. Note there is nothing so "unique" about a photograph of a pin that it could not be easily recreated and used to your hearts content... just a pin with black / gray background - good luck proving it was the same image form the file.

3) It is utterly irrelevant if the transaction is for trade or a cash sale. In the eyes of the IRS, trade / barter is just a sales transaction involving a medium other than cash. You're still subject to income tax, potentially sales tax, and possiblly capital gains tax on any profit. A trade of "equal value" pins --> ie ANY AGREED trade, is the equivalent of a sale for a defined price. Pin A for Pin B is the same in the taxman's eyes as Pin A for $$$$.
 
In terms of preventing it, that is easy. Code can be added to any site to prevent things like copying text or right clicking on a picture to save it.[/QUOTE]

Yep, and I have a ship named Titanic that is unsinkable.

So long as data is downloaded onto the users computer for display, anyone with a modest amount of computer skill and knowledge can easily bypass the "right click" lock out. Modern browsers will even display the source codes if you know how to ask them for the visual. At best it is a speed bump and not a particularily effective one.
 
Let's also remember: They bought the site - they can do whatever they want.

If someone doesn't like the new stuff, they should have bought it themselves.


Edit: I'm not taking any side in this.
 
Last edited:
JKrolac said,
Not again.. I thought we had managed to put this issue to bed.
Click to expand...
Who put this issue to bed? Not everyone is here 24 hours a day to voice their opinions. Please give others a chance to post what they want without complaining about it.

JKrolac said,
The intent is to make the seller post an actual image of what they are selling not the photo from the catalog. In theory, this would give a knowledgable buyer an opportunity to spot a counterfeit / scrapper pin before selling. There is nothing that would stop them from using a "standard" photo of a genuine pin that they took themselves to continue to fool bidders. But again that is not the issue here.
Click to expand...
While there is nothing to stop sellers from using a standard photo of a genuine pin and not the pin they are selling, the visible differences in a scratched, missing enamel, or one with dents would be obvious to the buyer when they do not receive a pin that looks exactly like the picture. Then all they have to do is file a dispute, because item is not the same as in the picture.
 
Hey Bretu and unibear,

I hope you are not directing these comments at me, because all I am saying is I like sellers to post pictures of actual pins I am trying to buy. I guess I have a right to post here if I am a member, don't I ?
 
Hi Movingthestars,

Thanks for telling me. I did not understand why my comment bothered them so much. LOL
 
I"m just making a statement. I like this forum because it's open for discussion. I love to hear everyone's opinion's whether I agree or not. I think everyone makes valid points. We all love pins and pin trading and the sale of PIN PICS affects us all in some way or another, I have added pins to the data base like many others, I sell on Ebay at times and I buy from Ebay all the time. Lets keep up the disscusions.
P.S. I love your color's Destiny
 
My core issue is the use of MY photos that were given to Pinpics, for everyone's use. Now, there are efforts to eliminate my ability to use my own photos. And, I do appreciate JKrolak's input on the matter above.

That being said..I understand a buyer's wish to see the actual item - but that is not always possible if you sell more than a few pins. Keep in mind, Disney doesn't let you see the "actual item" online and we take the risk with their stock photo. And, quality concerns have plighted Disney for years.

That being said - it still goes back to the reputation of the seller. As a seller, I believe condition is subjective -especially when older pins have not lastest the test of time. Scanning doesn't work on pins that are shiny or made of that metal prone to fingerprints. Highlighting a scan can also increase a possible flaw, as the hi-def of the photo is greater than the human eye.

My policy on my own sales has always been -if the pin differs from the Pinpics photo (by color or quality), then I show the actual item. Makes no sense to me to have to scan the photo when it looks identical to what I can find with Pinpics.
 
All I can say is this: Lansam seems to be willing to listen to the community (within reason) and they are making efforts to hear inputs.

Hopefully they will re-evaluate their decision as it doesn't seem to fit well. This will become clear when they reveal their new TOU. Until then, their intention is to hold more chat sessions. I sincerely hope the future chats will be better organized and more productive than yesterdays.
 
Putting discussion aside for a minute here - I just wanted to send out a thanks to Lenny, Anthony, and Samantha for taking the time to address our concerns. I look forward to their upcoming chat sessions!

OK, let's get the ball rolling! Again, the usual - keep things civil and polite :wiggle:

Carry on!
 
TiggerNut said:
That being said - it still goes back to the reputation of the seller. As a seller, I believe condition is subjective -especially when older pins have not lastest the test of time. Scanning doesn't work on pins that are shiny or made of that metal prone to fingerprints. Highlighting a scan can also increase a possible flaw, as the hi-def of the photo is greater than the human eye.

My policy on my own sales has always been -if the pin differs from the Pinpics photo (by color or quality), then I show the actual item. Makes no sense to me to have to scan the photo when it looks identical to what I can find with Pinpics.
Click to expand...

Reputation, while it helps in most cases, can be misleading sometimes, as we have seen before here as well as on E-Bay. Look at those who sell scrappers and get positive feedback from those who do not understand the difference, etc. Or what about those who have great feedback, and then just drop off the face of the earth? You did business with them because of their rating/feedback, and you still had problems.

Look at those who use stock photos for toys, books, etc. You buy a sealed Transformer because that is the picture, and you get one all loose in the box, upside down, etc. Well, it is the same item, and for those who open items like that, might not mind, but for those who like to display in box, it is misleading.

Also, not to mention, it is against E-Bay's user policy. Taken from:
Images and text policy

eBay members are not allowed to use images—including photos and other pictures—or text they didn't create themselves. Exceptions to this policy would be if they are authorized to do so by the owner, its agent, or the law.
Click to expand...

bretu said:
Someone has bought the pin traders bible and now they are telling us we can't reference from it. Blasphemy
Click to expand...

In fairness, you can reference it all you like. You just can not use their pictures, text, etc on E-Bay to sell items.
 
Last edited:
One thing to consider is the pinpics bandwidth usage if an auction listing uses a direct link to pinpics instead of making a copy of the image and uploading it during the auction listing process.

I ran a movie poster website many years ago and another site in Asia used our images (via direct links) in their store listings - the site got hit with a 400% bandwidth (2Gb allowed, 10Gb used) overage charge (much like what happens if you go over your monthly cell minutes or download data allocation) which cost several hundred extra dollars that month :mad: before I found out about it and removed the images. Hopefully pinpics has an 'unlimited bandwidth plan'.

As for references, websites automatically keep log files of what files are accessed and who requested them (IP address or website name) - an auction listing with a direct link to a pinpics images would show up in the logs with the auction site as the download requester. It is very easy to create a program to scan the logs looking for specific entries / patterns.

As a side note, log files are also one of the methods that is now used for tracking in HTML formatted email messages - the message has a 1 x 1 transparent image that also contains a customer ID value as part of the image link and that information is recorded in the log files for the site that hosts the image. 20 years ago email tracking was a fantasy (remember the "Bill Gates / AOL will pay you for forwarding the messages"?), but with the creation of HTML based email messages, not any more. That is why most email programs added image link blocking (skips over image requests using links) to their message display.
 
All I ask is you guys give this a chance. What if is actually does slow down the scrappers. I know some don't believe it will but the few times that I have had to contact ebay (as pinpics) they have taken action on what I was contacting them about. Also if it really does help even a little isn't it worth it? There is always a knee jerk reaction to change and most of the time people see the negative before giving the possible pluses a chance. Before you get upset and cry foul just give it a chance after it goes into effect to see if it helps. And I don't mean a week I mean several months to make inroads with ebay about this. They are trying to take a stand for the community as a whole give them a chance.

figgy
 
oy veh....well here is what happened to me TODAY. I bought 5 pins with a seller who has 100% feedback, but i never heard of them nor bid with them before. Package arrived promptly and 4 outa 5 pins are BAD scrappers. Here is a copy of my letter to them:

Hello, I have a problem with the following pins..I dont know how much selling or trading you do, but i am well versed in disney pins and the following pins are fake/scrapper pins. As a seller you should be closely examining the pins before selling and refer to the guidelines on pinpics. I didnt even have to check pinpics and by just holding and looking at them i could tell they were counterfiet and i will not pay for them nor trade them, contributing to this massive problem.

Cheshire cat hidden mickey---1.99
Jiminy Cricket. $1.59
Cheshire cat black and white 1.99
Pluto patriotic 2.04
minnie polka dot 1.79

ALL of these pins have multiple errors on them that match the scrapper descriptions, 100%, please look yourself. I request a full refund to my paypal for these pins For $9.30 and half the shipping of $2.75 I will hold off reporting you to ebay or leaving negative feedback but I will not return these blackmarket pins to be resold to niave collectors.
very disappointed.
dawn
here is the letter back

Dawn,
I am so sorry. I can hear the frustration in your words. I do not and will not send items out that I know to be scrappers. I have bought these items for resell on ebay myself from sellers I've been dealing with for awhile. As for pin pics truthfully, I have not looked up every pin on there to read for all the signs. I haven't had time as this is just a recent hobby I started and only work on it in the evenings. I do it for the love of the pins. I will defer to your wisdom on these pins and pay you your requested refund upon return of the items in question. Please look at my feedback, if this was my style to deceive innocent people, do you really think it would be 100%?
But, I must insist on the pins being returned (I will pay the cost)-for two reasons. First, I need to see them to educate myself in what to look for. And secondly, I must have them to return them to who I bought them from, so I too can get a refund of the money I paid out. Which is a reasonable request"

MY dumb opinion""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


Now TBH i dont know if actual pics of the pins would help, because it is hard enough seeing the back in person! This effort is cool if it could really help the scrapper problem....i just think we may all have a really hard time trading if we cant post pics from pinpics. I am not computer/camera savvy and it would just be too much trouble taking my own photos (which always come out crappy) and then figuring how to save them, retrieve them and post them.
It is out of my hands, i guess i like the ease of going to pinpics. The scrapper problem is large, but i am at least happy they are trying to think of something to combat it, but I am sure the bad guys are ahead of us. I will say i do feel more at ease, in that i dont think there is anything underhanded behind it, they are just making their way and i am willing to give them some rope.....
 
Dawny you can use the pictures here on the forum for trading and even selling purposes since they are more intimate and monitored just not on Ebay. So it shouldn't effect you unless you sell on ebay as well.

figgy
 
latemetal said:
If they truly are concerned about people getting scammed with bait and switch, this [eBay] is not where to start this.
Click to expand...

You raise some very compelling points. Bravo.

Also, it worries me that it has been said that Britt and Figgy were working with Lansam and about how often they talk and yet, today is the first they have heard of this very big change.
Click to expand...

To put the record straight, I believe that Figgy knew about this beforehand. She talks with them a lot more than I do, and although she and I chat about things as well, she can't be expected to recite their entire conversations word for word.

Even so, I don't expect that we'll be involved in every single decision. Some things may seem minor at first but create a lot of discussion, which is exactly what's happening here.

I am not even going to comment on Lansam's claim of ownership of the pictures PinPic's members allowed them to use as I feel they have no claim so I was trying to focus my post on the thinking behind the decision.
Click to expand...

As JKrolak did a great job explaining, the terms of uploading pictures are meant to ensure that 1) the uploader claims original rights to the picture, and 2) the uploader grants irrevocable permission for the site to use the picture without compensation. It's not reasonable to run a photo-enabled site when uploaders can subjectively grant and revoke image rights. Everyone should read JKrolak's post carefully, as he explains all this very well.

wdwjuan said:
Let's also remember: They bought the site - they can do whatever they want.
Click to expand...

While we're remembering that, let's also consider that their goal is to expand the site's features as best benefits the pin community. They've been very willing to gather opinions from the community and take these into consideration. Your statement suggests that you feel that you have little input in the process, which should be disproved by the lengths to which Lansam has gone to chat, post, and otherwise communicate their ideas.

Please don't allow the air of negativity to dissuade you from engaging in a thoughtful discussion. Well-reasoned and productive suggestions are always very welcome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top