Copytrack Announces Image Monitoring Deal

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
Today, Copytrack announced a big deal with Wenn Media Group, a European media company. Copytrack specializes in copyright enforcement via reverse image searching, and monitors the "international online use of images." The company says its services allow publishers, photographers, news agencies and e-commerce providers to protect their intellectual property, and claims to have a 98% accuracy rating. Interestingly, Copytrack doesn't directly charge users for the service, instead collecting a portion of the fees from infringers.

A promo video for the...questionable service can be seen here.

WMG Chairman and acting CEO Lloyd Beiny said, “We are delighted to pledge our 30 year old photo archive, which encompasses over 10 million images, to COPYTRACK, whose record of ensuring copyright owners are compensated for infringements of their IP is most impressive and, in my opinion, the very best service in the business. As the online digital world matures, the number of infringement incidents has increased exponentially. Photo assets owners need to demonstrably take a stand to curb this unlawful practice and ensure photographers and their agents are properly remunerated from those whose intent is to devalue our copyrights.”
 
Well if article 13 doesn't kill all memes, this surely will. And of course: queue nintendo claiming screenshots from their games.
 
There's a reason even 99% isn't good enough for companies. This one is satisfied with 98%? Copyright infringement may not be as serious as some of these, but it sure does inhibit creativity and cost money to fight false positives. Companies already don't fully investigate before issuing a takedown notice, instead using automated programs. Are they really going to fully vet all the ones they receive from this 98% accurate company? No way.

99.jpg
 
I personally despise when my photographs are used without permission. But this shouldn’t affect memes and what not.

I can see both sides. To a degree....
 
Great, just what the world needs. Another copyright troll company.
 
And of course there'll be no impact on these guys when the do make a false claims. No reimbursement for the accused for the time/money spent fighting the false claims.
 
And they make their money off the backs of the accused? So they have great incentives to consider something as infringing when evidence is circumstantial at best, and absolutely no incentive to improve their accuracy.
Copyright has gotten way too out o hand. No, i don;t want my stuff stolen and used by others to profit. But once even m grandchildren are dead, I think it's long past time for things I created to still be protected. For who's benefit? If the object is to provide incentive for peopel to create withotu fear it will be stolen from them, then why does protection extend so far past the lifetime of the creator? Oh yeah, Disney Corporation pays huge money to government officials, that's why. Probably some equivalent entity in the EU doign the same thing. Trolls, the lot of them.
 
If the original isn't 100% the same as the one the memer posted, isn't it original work? I'm sure there's some legalese that I don't know/understand somewhere. What if I changed the brightness, contrast or flip the picture? If every single pixel is different, how can it not be considered original work? Are individuals still allowed to have copyright protection, or is that only for big companies now?
 
Maybe this will inspire people to make original content and the world will enter the Meme Renaissance, bringing the joy and peace that the world so desperately needs right now. :love:
 
Maybe this will inspire people to make original content and the world will enter the Meme Renaissance, bringing the joy and peace that the world so desperately needs right now. :love:
I was thinking in similar terms.. with so many good cameras in phones... Unprotected contents just needs to be more successfully organized in a website or app or whatever.. if such thing doesn't already exist anyway..
 
If the original isn't 100% the same as the one the memer posted, isn't it original work? I'm sure there's some legalese that I don't know/understand somewhere. What if I changed the brightness, contrast or flip the picture? If every single pixel is different, how can it not be considered original work? Are individuals still allowed to have copyright protection, or is that only for big companies now?
A modified work is a derivative work which still falls under the copyright unless the owner expressly waived his rights to the work. This means basically that it's impossible to link or use anything online anymore unless it's been bought from a shop or you find the creators permit to use.

I couldnt care less if all memes in the world would disappear, never liked them anyway. Part of the stupidity that's called social media.
 
Back
Top