Slashdot Mirror


Developer Exposes Copyright Infringers On Twitter

snitty writes "Wil Shipley, developer of Delicious Library, found some applications on the iTunes App Store that were using without permission some images from his popular desktop application. He outed them on Twitter. The team at Technically Legal broke down the story and the take-home messages for using other people's images."

14 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Hmm by Itninja · · Score: 4, Informative

    When the President does it, it's not illegal.

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
  2. Re:Hmm by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Macbook, Starcraft, Peggle... Are those fair use applications?

    More to the point: did he try to pass them off as his own? No.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  3. The Image by FornaxChemica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The copyrighted image is actually the "woodgrain background", quoting Technically Legal. Is this a joke? The whole story is about a background texture being stolen? Some actual artists out there who've been ripped off must be feel pretty distressed right now.

    1. Re:The Image by WarwickRyan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bingo.

      Why didn't he just email them and ask them either not to use his pictures, or to pay him for them?

      Seems to me like the real reason for him being angry is that the iPhone application he's complaining about looks to be basically an iPhone version of his desktop application. Someone beat him to it on the iPhone and he's mad..

    2. Re:The Image by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why didn't he just email them and ask them either not to use his pictures, or to pay him for them?

      Because sometimes even when you do both of those things, you get nowhere fast. Twitter is something that a lot of people utilize and it's a good way to go about expressing your frustration and getting the word out to a lot of people (including the offender) quickly.

    3. Re:The Image by diamondsw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except he's been on the iPhone for a while - until Amazon yanked all mobile licenses to their data.

      This goes back to the whole issue of stealing "look and feel", which they most certainly did. Whether that constitutes legal copyright infringement is beyond me (and I imagine 99% of the commenters on /.).

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    4. Re:The Image by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Outing someone for infringing your copyright is akin to vigilante justice.

      WTF? No it's not, not at all.

      Vigilante justice would be breaking into his house and stealing stuff worth what you consider to be the value of a license to use your copyrighted work.

      Beating him up would also be vigilante justice.

      Do you even know what "vigilante" means? Holy cow man. Yelling "Stop! Thief!" is not vigilantism, and neither is calling someone who steals your picture a copyright infringer.

      If it does turn out it's similar but not his texture then he's opened himself up for law suits for defamation.

      Not really, do you understand what defamation is? It's damaging one's reputation, character, or good name by slander or libel.

      Now, slander is a false statement injurious to a person's reputation. Libel is essentially the same with print.

      All that to say, if the person saying/writing it believes it to be the truth, then it is not slander or libel and therefor not defamation. Slander and Libel, and therefore defamation, are notoriously difficult to prove. Else we would not have the political system we have.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    5. Re:The Image by Anubis+IV · · Score: 3, Informative

      So did this guy contact EVERY company and artist about offering to sell the cover images online? (His product is $40)

      Yes. He gets the images from Amazon, and he's been in talks with them for some time on the subject, just to make sure that he accesses and uses the images and data in a legal manner. But hey, accusing him without looking into the situation is all the rage these days, so I can understand where you're coming from.

  4. Lol.. reminds me of a friend. by joocemann · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know the guy who made the blue frog on the Azureus startup screen.... and it wasn't for Azureus.

    lol.

  5. I wish it were a joke by KingSkippus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It sure sounds like a joke, doesn't it? I mean, come on, he's all bent out of shape over a woodgrain texture? It's not like they took his logo or something distinctive about his application. It sounds pretty petty to me.

    I hate to say it, Mr. Shipley, but this is not the kind of trivial copyright stuff that we're constantly railing against. From TFA:

    If the owner of the image has registered that copyright, it can open you up to RIAA v. The People sized damages: thousands to tens of thousands of dollars per infringement.

    Congratulations Mr. Shipley, you're now being compared to organizations like the RIAA. Were you Right(TM) (as in, technically correct in that your copyright was violated)? Sure, I'll concede that, and if they knew that the texture came from you, they should have checked if it was okay before using it. But where you right (as in, responding in an ethically appropriate way)? Absolutely not. Again, from TFA:

    So I'm going to call them thieves publicly and embarrass them. Skip the lawyers, let's go back to shaming people!

    Mr. Shipley, it strikes me that you decided to publicly call someone a thief and unilaterally decided to shame them without really knowing the circumstances of the situation. Did they simply decide that they didn't want to pay for a texture, and maliciously rip yours off? Maybe. But I find it just as likely that they may have simply assumed that it was a public domain texture.

    Or just maybe, being a small outfit or independent developer (which I can certainly empathize with), they got it from a third party who represented that it was either public domain or their texture. I know that for community projects I'm involved with, being as artistic as a two-by-four, when I need a resource like that, I usually post a message somewhere saying something like, "Hey, does anyone have an icon/texture/whatever that I can use?" If someone sends me one, I usually do the due diligence of asking them if I have the rights to use it (e.g. if it's public domain or, if they created it, if they are willingly giving me the rights to use it), but it's not like I hire a lawyer to do a detailed search of everything that's ever been copyrighted to verify it. I simply don't have the time or money to do so.

    So according to TFA, "there are really two important take-away messages from this story." Actually there is at least one more. Some people can really be stupid and petty about such things, making mountains out of molehills, and unfortunately, the legal system today favors those people. Oh, and maybe another is that it's getting harder and harder to be a small, independent developer these days because of idiocy like this. Every time you turn around and no matter what you do, there are people out there who want to squash you like a bug, people ranging from other small developers to giant corporations. Everything from "Hey, you used a button, and we use a button, so we're suing you!" to "You thief, you stole my generic-looking woodgrain texture, waaah!"

    1. Re:I wish it were a joke by KingSkippus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ignorance of the law is no defense.

      No, but there is such a thing as "reasonable perspective." This guy is so worked up about a frickin' woodgrain texture that he's wanting to sue for losses, and since that would actually cost some money, instead resorts to calling the other developer a thief? I don't care if they did knowingly swipe the texture, that's stupid, plain and simple.

      Do you ever speed on a highway? Technically, you're breaking the law every time you do. How would you like it if a police officer decided that he just plain doesn't like you? He stakes out your house, and every time you go 56 in a 55, he dings you with a ticket. Even more, the judge doesn't like you either, so you don't get stuck with a minor violation, you get charged with reckless driving and have to go to jail.

      It was a frickin' woodgrain texture. The appropriate response would have been to just let it slide. The "I'm irritated" response would have been to e-mail the developer and said, "Hey, that's my texture, please remove it from your app." His actual response, though, is stupid and petty.

      Most artists don't make enough for their work as it is

      Yeah, because I'm sure that's why people were using these applications. Not just because of the woodgrain texture, but because of that specific woodgrain texture. Any other woodgrain texture would have made both the original application and the iPhone app pieces of crap. People are seeing that specific woodgrain texture on the iPhone app and thinking, "The app is just okay, but that texture is so... beautiful...

      Puhleeze. I'm sorry, I thought this was about an application, not a "work of art." Sounds like someone is a little too full of themselves.

  6. Re:He's complaining about... by diamondsw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Delicious Library is one of the most popular Mac shareware apps, and is exceptionally well-designed. Those wood bookcases are central to its UI look and feel. And he's already written an iPhone app - except Amazon decided to yank all mobile licenses to their data. Yes, that's right, he pays Amazon for access to their data, so it is legal use and paid for.

    So your entire post is written like a true asshat who has no idea what's going on, and has contributed nothing. But that never stops Slashdot.

    --
    I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
  7. Re:He's complaining about... by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dude... thanks for telling.

    I though this was about the icons and glyphs, which in many high-quality applications are actually designed by external design studios for lots of money. I can imagine getting pissed about somebody taking something which you actually had to pay quite a bit for.

    But this is just a woodgrain texture, and a pretty ugly one at it.
    I mean seriously, it isn't hard to make a woodgrain texture lots better than that one:
    5 minute photoshop tutorial: http://www.tutorio.com/tutorial/photoshop-wood-texture
    Free windows program for making wood textures: http://www.spiralgraphics.biz/ww_overview.htm

    Heck, for all we know he actually used one of these or a source image, in which case he couldn't even claim copyright over it since anybody who made it themselves using such methods would end up with an identical texture.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  8. Priorities by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wish he'd spend less time Twittering and blogging and more time fixing the bugs in Delicious Library 2 that have been there since the beta. There's like, what, one update a year for that application? I don't even bother running it any more.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.