TinEye

[Shadowman]

Has anyone used this search engine, it is an image reverse lookup program?

https://tineye.com/

[Manfred M]

Has anyone used this search engine, it is an image reverse lookup program?

https://tineye.com/

It's a search engine that you can use to see if your images have been stolen and posted by someone else.

[Shadowman]

It's a search engine that you can use to see if your images have been stolen and posted by someone else.

Manfred,

Thanks for the information, the website was featured in a documentary I recently viewed.

[DanK]

I couldn't get it to work. I first tried an image that I know has been stolen. It wouldn't accept the link name from Smugmug, so I followed their instructions and uploaded the image to the Tineye site. It didn't find it. Then I tried the same with an image I posted here a day or two ago. It didn't find that one either.

[Manfred M]

I tried it when it first came out and not surprisingly, none of my images were reported as having been stolen; their search database was quite small at the time. I'm pretty sure that they have been around for at least a decade. Even now, they only have around 30 billion images, so a fairly small sample of all of the images uploaded onto the net.

[Shadowman]

I tried it on a few of my images and didn't get any hits, I used to be able to enter one of my images into the Google search engine; by title which I had uploaded to the CiC forum and I would get a hit linking the image to this forum, but lately the same images aren't found at least on the first three or four pages.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...0&vt=0&eim=0,1

This is my image posted on CiC years ago and was found on Bing search engine, when I searched through TinEye they couldn't find it.

[Manfred M]

I tried it on a few of my images and didn't get any hits, I used to be able to enter one of my images into the Google search engine; by title which I had uploaded to the CiC forum and I would get a hit linking the image to this forum, but lately the same images aren't found at least on the first three or four pages.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?v...0&vt=0&eim=0,1

This is my image posted on CiC years ago and was found on Bing search engine, when I searched through TinEye they couldn't find it.

I clicked on your image and it pointed to TinyPic, which of course no longer has any images since they closed. My guess it is likely the image you posted here on CiC. I wonder if this is an old, stored search result?

[Shadowman]

I clicked on your image and it pointed to TinyPic, which of course no longer has any images since they closed. My guess it is likely the image you posted here on CiC. I wonder if this is an old, stored search result?

It could be, when you click on the Cambridge in Colour link it goes directly to the thread but no image is available.

[Val Mansfield]

I just uploaded a photo as a trial. It came up with two matches, both in photo stocks. They were close but not my shot.

It didn't find my shot in Smugmug. Should it have?

[Shadowman]

I just uploaded a photo as a trial. It came up with two matches, both in photo stocks. They were close but not my shot.

It didn't find my shot in Smugmug. Should it have?

If you search by URL it should but haven't tried that method, I think for images it uses more than the image (such ad metadata, tags) to do the search which to me makes it more than an image recognition program. I only mention the URL method as its described as a reverse image search method.

[Val Mansfield]

If you search by URL it should but haven't tried that method, I think for images it uses more than the image (such ad metadata, tags) to do the search which to me makes it more than an image recognition program. I only mention the URL method as its described as a reverse image search method.

The message was that the URL was in an unsupported format.

[Manfred M]

The message was that the URL was in an unsupported format.

I found that uploading an image worked and I found one of the ones I tested had been pirated.

[Manfred M]

This is what TinEye found:








This is my original image:




And no, they did not get my approval to use the image...

[Shadowman]

Manfred,

Thanks for posting the example, it looks like the owner of the twitter account is the Ottawa Market themselves, I see a few associations with their use of your image that is interesting; at least to me. One is, considering the fact that they have full access to their own market, it is interesting that they feel the need to find images of their own establishment in order to make a tweet. Also, considering that most of the images I've seen on their website, twitter feed, and through Google/Bing search were taken during the daytime; your image must've been a unique find in that it was taken at night. Also, since its their own market you'd think they'd have time themselves to take an image at night without the need to go searching for a lowlight image of their own store. And finally, don't know what the Canadian laws are on trademarks but I wonder if they've trademarked their market's name and if so does it give them the belief that any image of their own market/trademark give them the right to use it as they see fit. I know in the U.S. trademarks don't trump copyright laws so an entity cannot assume ownership of an image, however some corporations can limit a photographer's ability to photograph a trademarked symbol or building with limitations; if the photographer can see the trademarked item from a public space then they are within their rights to photograph it. I know there are a lot of assumptions in this reply but just found it interesting as to who actually used your image.

[Manfred M]

John - I think you will find that copyright laws are not dissimilar in most countries whose legal code is based on English "common law". The "rights holders" are probably better looked after in the USA and so far as I understand it, Canada has very broad exemptions for "educational purposes".

When I was a practicing engineer, in those days before I retired, I spent quite some time with the company I worked for legal department who dealt with a number of issues including protecting the corporate intellectual property. Pardon the pun, but this issue here is rather black and white legally. The image was likely scraped from either the Flickr site or from here, as those are the only two places this image was ever posted (add Facebook to that list now). The shot was taken from a public space and in Canada we have the "right of panorama"; so with the building having been constructed in 1926, I suspect any legal residuals on the architectural design have in all likelihood lapsed, even if that were not in place. So far as I know, the 1975 renovations largely dealt with the interior of the building.

Regardless, no one contacted me for permission to use the image and I'm not that hard to find.

[Shadowman]

Manfred,

Thanks for responding and on another note regarding who found the image, I guess it also could be assumed that someone with very few corporate responsibility within the organization could be maintaining the twitter account and are unaware of copyright laws, doesn't excuse them just means they may not have knowledge of any trademark rights but were acting on an assumed belief of free usage.

[Manfred M]

Manfred,

Thanks for responding and on another note regarding who found the image, I guess it also could be assumed that someone with very few corporate responsibility within the organization could be maintaining the twitter account and are unaware of copyright laws, doesn't excuse them just means they may not have knowledge of any trademark rights but were acting on an assumed belief of free usage.

While your guess could be correct, that is still no excuse. Someone along the production chain allowed this to happen.

Every program I have ever taken had some mention of legal (and ethical) issues associated with the creative processes. It didn't matter if this involved image creation, sound design, videography / film making or engineering. Anything involving what we loosely term as "intellectual property", whether that be patents, copyright, integrated circuit architecture or industrial designs (I believe these are called design patents in the USA) has to be considered by the team doing the creative work. So far as I understand it, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Me me put in another way. I'm pretty sure I would hear from Ottawa Markets's lawyer quite quickly if I published a nude in front of their logo, even if the image were taken in a totally legal fashion from a public space.

[ST1]

While your guess could be correct, that is still no excuse. Someone along the production chain allowed this to happen.

Every program I have ever taken had some mention of legal (and ethical) issues associated with the creative processes. It didn't matter if this involved image creation, sound design, videography / film making or engineering. Anything involving what we loosely term as "intellectual property", whether that be patents, copyright, integrated circuit architecture or industrial designs (I believe these are called design patents in the USA) has to be considered by the team doing the creative work. So far as I understand it, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Me me put in another way. I'm pretty sure I would hear from Ottawa Markets's lawyer quite quickly if I published a nude in front of their logo, even if the image were taken in a totally legal fashion from a public space.

Will you be advising the Market that they owe you an enormous amount of $Can (or a small amount if you prefer) licence fee for the continued unauthorised use of your image.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Manfred M]

Will you be advising the Market that they owe you an enormous amount of $Can (or a small amount if you prefer) licence fee for the continued unauthorised use of your image.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I will be contacting them early next year (once the holiday season is over and their office is back in operation) and will be asking them to remove the image and will be informing them on the legal and ethical lapses that they have made.

I am not (and have never been) in the business of making and selling stock images. If the compensation issue comes up, I will be asking them to make a donation to a charity or not-for-profit institution of my choice.

[DanK]

I'm curious how you got it to work.

I tried copying and pasting the smugmug links for images I have posted here. TinEye rejects them, saying it can't read the URL. It suggests the problem is format, but the links are JPEGs. I then downloaded a copy of a JPEG that I posted here to my hard drive and uploaded that to TinEye. Even thought that image is on CiC, TinEye didn't find it.