ShutterStock.com used by "Design Weasels."
Like 99% of all the rip-offs of my art I was informed of this violation via email from the agency who originally hired me to create the art for them in the first place. They spotted my artwork being sold on ShutterStock.com.
Having my artwork ripped off is nothing new to me. Unethical corporate weasels can be effectively dealt with via legal measures to hold them accountable. It's a pain to deal with but as you can read in the linked post can be successfully handled.
What upsets me the most is so-called fellow designers or in this case a "Design Weasel" by the screen name of "Milann" who took my hawk mascot art and repurposed it under the guise that it's their own creation and uploaded it to his/her ShutterStock.com account so they could sell it to other designers who purchase pre-fab art on the cheap.
My original "Black Hawk" artwork.
The one aspect about being an Illustrative Designer I love is the creative process. Actually working through the development of ideas, refining my art and seeing it come to life and enjoying how others respond to it. That in and of itself makes all the effort to create the artwork worth it for me. The fact I get paid to do it is awesome.
Not only are these design weasels causing me problems but they are missing out on the best part of being a creative, and that is to create. They will never know the true passion and joy found in the midst of a creative process if they just rip-off the end result from other creatives. It's kind of sad really and just flat out wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin?
Animated comparison. Direct lift of my artwork.
Perhaps the design weasel in question will read this post? With that in mind let me talk directly to designer "Milann" who ripped me off.
I suggest you take serious inventory about your own career path. You've been caught, your identity might remain nebulous, but you still know how much of a design weasel you've been in doing this.
You can choose to keep acting like a design weasel, ripping other peoples artwork off and refusing to be an actual creative, or you can realize you've mad poor choices and turn over a new design leaf and start over. Challenge yourself, make a commitment to design excellence and begin to grow your own skills and talent so that you can truly be a successful creative and stop being part of the problem. It's your choice.
Corporations Hide Behind DMCA
Since Clinton passed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) back in 1998 online businesses have been hiding behind it when copyright violations are discovered on their own sites. In a nut shell a company can post anything they want and get away with it as long as it takes before someone notices, once they are notified of the copyright infringement all they have to do is remove it. No compensation is given, no royalties paid, no usage fees given. The artist basically gets screwed and the company hides behind the DMCA to justify all of it.
You can read about it for yourself via this DMCA PDF.
Weasel designers and weasel corporations are usually found nested together in their weasel dens of design iniquity.
Hopefully sites like ShutterStock.com will exterminate the design weasels and do a better job of vetting their content. I realize full-blame should rest solely on the shoulders of the individuals who choose to steal the art to begin with and use stock sites to distribute it.
Personally I wish Google would buy a company like Tineye.com and really make this type of searching more viable for artists to monitor who is using their work without permission. Then stock companies could plugin to this service and make it part of their upload protocol and help prevent design weasels from flourishing online.
Follow Up - Phase 1
I know some will disagree with me but I feel when a company like ShutterStock.com hides behind the DMCA like weasel corporate suits it doesn't help anyone. And I'm sorry but I find this statement they provided a little bit self-serving:
"Shutterstock's Privacy Statement constrains me from providing the information you request regarding the alleged infringer."
So let it be known that anyone can use a service like ShutterStock.com to distribute stolen art and they'll cover your back from any legal repercussion via their own self-defined privacy statement if you happen to get caught. Seems like a conflict of interest to me?
I'll give them this though, they have pulled the artwork down and closed the account for the user "Milann." Good, that is an appropriate response. But to say that "Milann" is an "Alleged Infringer" is just corporate weasel talk. Seriously, is there any doubt that this clown stole my art? I'm not alleging anything, I'm stating fact. But I digress.
Follow Up - Phase 2
OK, all is resolved now. All I need to say is Twitter rules!
