[robertob]

It p*sses me off too. As a sometimes-published photographer, I would lose my sh*t if I found images I shot being used without my permission (ESPECIALLY if they were being SOLD).

It is totally illegal - just like ripping DVDs and selling copies. There's no difference.

Any of the photographers whose images those are can sue this guy for thousands, if he has any money.

Please send the link to any site that you believe is the original owner of these images.

 

[robertob]

Geeto gets it - if I take a picture, I OWN that image. Period - I don't have to do anything else to maintain ownership of that image if I can legally prove that I took it (i.e. I have the only full-res version).

If I email you a 1200X800 jpeg of it, you cannot then print it out and sell it.

Incidentally that's why most photographers do not give out full-res versions of their images.

Whenever I shoot a car for a magazine, I give the owner the out-takes on CD, but I always down-size them to 1200x800 and put my watermark in the file. That way I can keep track of them. The only person that gets hi-res images is the magazine, and they're buying my work for one instance of publication in a specific magazine so even there I'm protected.

If the linked guy has the rights to his images and is printing and selling them, there is no problem at all.

If he does not, there is a big problem.

I would give him the benefit of the doubt, though, because the penalties are pretty severe.

Especially the MotoGP shots - he would have to be a total moron to take those images and sell them if he does not own the copyright.