• 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
TiggerNut

TiggerNut

New DPF Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Messages
283
Location
Southern California
At the chat today hosted by LANSAM/Pinpics -it was revealed that Pinpics will no longer allow the use of Pinpics photos for Ebay.

This information was provided by LANSAM in the live chat on March 27, 2012.

As someone who provided Pinpics with over 10,000 photos in the last 10-12 years, this change does effect me substantially as I provided those photos in the first place -with the intent that the community could use them for whatever purpose and so that I could then retrieve for my purpose.

The photos contributed are still my property, and it appears that Pinpics/Lansam now wishes to stop my use of my own photos.

Pinpics/Lansam cannot grandfather in a clause that makes my photo their property, as I did not transfer copyright of the photo to them, only its use. A watermark does not change the copyright of something automatically.

This proposal is one that does damage me personally and many others in the community. I would suggest that Lansam/Pinpics has the right to do what they please with new photos, but those from before the transfer of ownership and change in TOS should remain the same as they were.

Diana
 
yeh, i wasn't on the chat for super long, but long enough to see two important questions, not answered, even when people pressed the question and this picture use thing....deeply concerns me. First, i dont understand why they would care whatsoever? Is it because that would force a seller to use their own pics of the actual pin they are selling, if so that may be helpful becuase i have had sellers post a pic from pinpics and then sell me a scrapper that looks nothing like the pin. My concern is that no pictures or descriptions are altered and that authentication is true and honest.
 
How can they do that if many of the pictures are direct from a Disney website? And as Diana has mentioned, uploaded by the community.
 
I wondered how this is possible as well as I have also donated pictures. I guess if they replaced all of our images with new ones it could happen, but I would hate to not be able to use my own images.
 
If I understood right, during discussion it became clear that this was not an easy, decide-on-the-spot issue. They might need more time to take a deeper look in this before making a final decision.

Also, you can of course use your own photos if you kept the older scans, negatives what-have-you. But keep in mind that PinPics was started for trading and not selling. So, it is somewhat in keeping with their initial mission. Also, their TOU mentions NON-COMMERCIAL use, for pro sellers with a business it is obviously commercial.

TiggerNut said:
This proposal is one that does damage me personally and many others in the community.
Click to expand...

Consider the other side .... If you are selling a dress for example, would you not want to take its pictures, front and back. I do buy American Girl Doll clothes on Ebay and I would not bid unless I see the American Girl tag in the picture, good sellers show it.

Same way, I also feel more comfortable buying if I see the actual pin in the picture and not some stock photo. Too many times I ended up with scratched or damaged pins, but a good close up of the pin could have solved that problem.

Sometimes it is also useful to see the pin's back. Take for example. 1.5 yrs ago, an Ebay seller had listed this pin with a stock photo. I asked her what the back-stamp was. I got an answer like this:" I am in my office right now and I do not have the pin with me." She never got back to me on that and I did not buy. But in this case, if I could see the back of the pin, it would make a big difference.
 
I have contributed a few images to PinPics as well and don't like this new idea about not being able to use the images. The only good that could come from not allowing eBay sellers to use the PinPics pictures is preventing scrappers and counterfeits from being sold to buyers.
 
I am sorry, but ebay is just a part of this hobby. Why are so many people against it when we are ALL using it? So what if the pictures are used on ebay? As long as the sellers are giving pinpics credit for the picture it should be fine right?

If you want to see a picture of the actual pin ask the seller to send you one. If they don't want to then don't buy it. That is what I do and 99% of the time I get the picture.
 
Merryweather said:
Also, their TOU mentions NON-COMMERCIAL use, for pro sellers with a business it is obviously commercial.
Click to expand...

This TOS was a recent change. Pinpics allowed everyone to use the Photos for commercial purposes, so long as Pinpics was attributed as the source.

The other part of this, is they are targeting Ebay sellers, not the sale boards here. Both should be treated equally, no matter the final decision -as both are commercial. This distinction was made in chat.

As an aside...my very early original photos, given to Pinpics, are long gone. I never thought I would have a problem accessing the photos before -so I didn't worry about it. Granted, this is TEN years ago of photos... it defeated the purpose having 2 places to store the same photo.
 
If the majority of the community does not like this new policy then how can they implement it? Isn't the point of this hobby and pinpics do be for, not against the community wishes?
 
Here, is the thing - bad guys will always find a way to thwart the system -where that is photo the real one and sell the fake, or use the concept art provided by Disney.

I believe Ebay's buyer protection is a much better use for battling bad pins; than Pinpics eliminating the use of photos from their site. One can always get their money back and leave negative when they get a bad pin from Ebay. I use stock photos myself -for time saving.
 
I am sorry..but if we provide the pic..we should still be able to use it..even though its on Pinpics
Maybe we need to add watermarks to ours too...something is not right with that.
 
But in using actual photos..how far does this go? If someone is selling a fake pin, they have hundreds, not just one. So, they take the photo of one of the best looking designs and keep using it...how does that help?

And how far do we go? - does it have to now be the backs of the pins too? I mean, at some point, you just have to go with trusted sellers and know you are protected by Ebay/Paypal.
 
I get that it's easier to use pinpic pictures... but if you list anything else on ebay, how hard is it to just take your own picture?

I don't think it's a great move for pinpics but I see no problem either way :U
 
The problem is that it's a slippery slope. It starts with one thing and who knows what is next. :(
 
You know most of this Pinpics stuff I haven't really felt one way or the other on, but this doesn't quite add up for me. I mean, I can kinda see why they would want to protect the pictures used on the site. However I feel like they have no way of implementing this. All the thousands of pictures on PP have been redistributed on ebay, multiple forums, and other websites over the past however many years it has been open. When you add in the fact most of the pictures were donated by members(or taken directly from disney), and could have been put on other parts of the internet by the original owners of the pictures at any time, it makes it really difficult to distinguish ownership of the pictures. I think the only way they could do this would be if they implement a policy Only covering new pictures from now on, and make members sign off somehow that they legally no longer own their picture of the pin. Which, I think, is something a lot of people would be hesitant to do.
 
TiggerNut said:
But in using actual photos..how far does this go? If someone is selling a fake pin, they have hundreds, not just one. So, they take the photo of one of the best looking designs and keep using it...how does that help?

And how far do we go? - does it have to now be the backs of the pins too? I mean, at some point, you just have to go with trusted sellers and know you are protected by Ebay/Paypal.
Click to expand...



EXCELLENT point diana, its like putting a band aid on a torn off limb. Criminals are one step ahead, i like the idea from someone above, if you want a "live" pic of a pending bid,,,ask the seller. I guess they figure you dont need to do that on here becuase everyone here are ligit traders, who knows, but most of all, this is the main discussion out of the Q&A, but i wanted to know more about who is the authenticator and more about Lennys relation to fraud and scrappers? sorry i know its personal but not when you have 2 hands into a business we all spend way too much on, and we totally (or i do) rely on pinpics as our guide.
 
I think this is something that is not fully matured and they should definitely look into this in detail for many reasons.

I believe that their intention is to discourage scrapper sellers, but I am not sure how effective this is going to prove.

Part of these chats and Q & A sessions are to bounce ideas and see what others think. I am sure that they got the message.
 
Lasy year I donated a ton on my personal pin pictures to pinpics, before the sale to the new owners. I considered it a little way for me to contribute back to the site. Since the sale I have not donated any as I wanted to see how it all shook out. It is funny to me to see my pictures all over ebay.

Anyway, if pinpics wants to continue using my pictures, that is fine. However, as far as I am concerned, anyone else who wants to use them, can. I use my pictures elsewhere on the internet and I am not going to remove them.
 
dawny said:
but i wanted to know more about who is the authenticator
Click to expand...

Sadly, the chat was very disorganised. They answered this question twice, but it got lost. The authenticator was something they wanted to offer as part of the premium package. They have yet to find someone expreienced and trustworthy in this area. So far, it is only a "dream" as Samantha said.

Maybe I did not get everything, in that case you can see the chat log here:

http://www.pintalk.com/showthread.php?3667-Q-amp-A-Chat-Log

Lenny answers the latest posts about himself and being a counterfeitor here:

http://www.pintalk.com/showthread.p...y-accusations-of-Diana-Delker-a.k.a-TiggerNut.

To those who are convinced without knowing/meeting this man, if he swears over every known holy book and says "No, these are not true" nothing will be enough :(

I have to go with "Innocent until proven guilty"
 
Last edited:
hey thanks so much merryweather....i got through the Lenny letter, to tired to read the whole chat thing...chatted out. That was well worded and had alot of information, pretty much alot of what i was wanting to have answered.
 
I only learned about this new restriction today, so I haven't had time to formulate an opinion. I understand where they're coming from, but let me give a bit of history.

I originally didn't want Pin Pics images used for any commercial purpose, but I was also a pin trader. The reality at the time (we're talking 12 years ago) was that most online pin trading happened on eBay, and the sellers typically posted bad or blatantly incorrect descriptions, often without any picture at all. Traders were getting duped, not by scrappers but by incorrect information, often not deceitfully but merely to the best of the sellers' own faulty knowledge.

Allowing an exception for eBay solved two problems: 1) Every auction could have a picture. Believe it or not, it was hard to take pictures at the time (digital camera whut?) and even harder to get them in a format suitable for eBay (photoshop whut?). Also, 2) the required attribution to Pin Pics was a great way to spread the word about that resource. Sellers and buyers both became better informed about the pins, which made listing and buying them on eBay a lot more comfortable.

Fast forward to today, and we're facing a different set of problems. Anyone listing anything on eBay should now have access to excellent tools for taking and managing their auctions, including libraries of pictures of the actual items being sold. There's really no excuse for using a stock photo when the buyer should be looking at the actual item for sale, including any scratches, discolorations, or other blemishes. Furthermore, anyone with questions about the legitimacy of a listing's description is just a Google search from more info than they can shake a stick at. It's very easy to find information about pins.

Does it make sense, then, for the eBay exception to expire? Is it causing more bad now than good? Is it allowing unscrupulous sellers to peddle their wares while providing very little additional benefit to the good sellers that use their own images anyway? Lansam seems to think so, and I'm willing to concede the point. I haven't bought from eBay for a while, so I'm not in a position to say how bad their scrapper problem has become.

Regardless, it's never been the case that a picture submitted to Pin Pics means that you give up rights to it. It's your picture -- you still can do whatever you want with it, but please use the original rather than linking directly to Pin Pics. It's going to be hard enough for them to enforce this long-standing rule (remember -- eBay was just an exception to the rule) without the original picture providers being some kind of special case that just muddies up the policy.

Put down the pitch forks, guys.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top