The Cheap Photographer

People can now pull your photograph from your site, post it at and the owners of the site can profit by building up an audience and selling ads; all without either the photographers’ knowledge or permission.  That annoys me.  It annoys me but it’s not new.  It’s just that this is for photography only.

Anyway, I just happened to find myself at:

I guess it’s not different than other linking places, where you get to post the good stuff you’ve found, but somehow, this one seems different.  I’m not sure why.  In other words, I never had problems with StumbleUpon or Digg because they give you traffic back in return; and so does this site.  I don’t know.  I can’t explain why this site annoyed me.  Nope.  All mysterious to me, why this discovery should annoy me and the others don’t.

If you post your stuff on your web site and you say, copyright Dave Beckerman, cannot be used for any purpose without written permission… that doesn’t mean anything to anyone… and anyway – you want the publicity – don’t you…?  Well – don’t you, punk?   You’ll be happy with any posting of your images so long as they spell your URL right.

Just feeling grumpy.  Better get to bed before I write something that should’ve been saved as draft first.


Published by


My name is Dave Beckerman. I am a fine art photographer working in New York City.

6 thoughts on “The Cheap Photographer”

  1. Dave, use of someone’s photography without permission is clearly a violation of copyright. They are building their web site with yours and others content. Unfortunately, this is the bad aspect of the Internet. It is way to easy for someone to copy or “save image as” from a web site–yours, mine, anybody’s. And it can be an automated process.

    For this reason, I do not send the full article/post in the RSS feed. I only send a summary. I purposefully write a paragraph before the photo. That is sent in the RSS feed, but not a photo. That first paragraph, the lead, has to be a grabber.

    Second, I use a really nifty little plugin called WP-CopyProtect, v1.6 by Chetan Gole. It disables any right-click operations and can give the viewer a message. Mine says “Sorry, copyright protected.” You can set the plugin for photos and/or text. It cannot protect you work from those who get the RSS feed where you have actually delivered it to them!

    It’s a tough call: send it all in the RSS feed so that your audience gets everything without having to click through back to your web site. Or, send a summary and hope they click through, but protect your work from those who would abuse the RSS feed.

    BTW, I like the new look.


  2. Hi Dave:

    I don’t remember the rules about copyright and linking. If I have some time im the mext day or two I will lok at it. I’m curious about it.



    Hey Dave-

    You might consider touching base with Carolyn Wright, the phot0-theeves nightmare. She does not like people who abuse intellectual property, your creation… I believe she works on contigency. Just point her in the right direction and turn her loose.

  4. Sorry to be a Socratic gadfly here, but isn’t putting graffiti on someone’s private property equivalent to using someone else’s photos on one’s website? Seems hardly any street photographers are bothered by posting photos of graffiti artists’ “work” mounted, so to speak, on other peoples’ property and then selling those photos without giving royalties to the graffiti artist.

  5. I have to disagree Lester. Hijacking an image from one website and putting it up on another as your own is more like removing the graffiti artists tag and putting your tag to it. With your type of thinking I’d have to pay a royalty to the car manufacturers, dave would have to pay the designers of the war monument seen in his latest post. The only one who deserves royalty is Dave’s cat!

  6. Van Gogh doesn’t pay the owner of the Cypress Trees and the street photographer doesn’t pay the guy jumping over the puddle.

    There’s no easy answer to the ethics of street photography. It is called, TAKING, a picture. And the photographer, especially the good ones, are interested in taking something. But so is any artist.

    Part grifter, part moralist, and part artist – they roam around looking for material that 99% of the time will be of no interest. But oh – that 1%. That can be something.

Comments are closed.