Bad Guy Reptilesncritters.com - Thieves

[rjarosek]

Ryan,

His facebook profile picture appears to helps explain a lot about his confusion as to why photographs are protected by copyright and why blatant and repeated copyright infringement draws his credibility and ethics into question, don't you think?

Chris

It does help make sense of things

 

[JColt]

I am mean, come on, don't you folks have better things to do with your time?

It's called watching out for one another. At least the people who want to keep this hobby and business honest and healthy. A lot of people would probably give permission to use the photo's if properly asked and recognized for it.

 

[lauraleellbp]

Are you overreacting? That's a matter of opinion. In my opinion you are, but to the small inner sanctum of the reptile community I am some kind of evil to be beaten. I mean come on? Are you people all for real? Is it that much of a serious "integrity" issue? Most of these images, with the exception of a small minority were either given to me, or are in the public domain. The remainder of any offending images will be removed in good time and at my own pace. And how, I might ad, do I "falsely represent" my own animals when in most cases I have express permission to use these images on my website? Just because I do not have the animals in my possession, does not mean that I cannot or should not use them. The images on my website serve merely as representational display images of the animals for sale and my customers know full well that the images of the animals on my website are not of the actual animals for sale. This is my way of doing business and it has served my customers and my business very well. So to recap, I do not agree with your value judgement, which is really your own subjective values being forced upon myself.

It's the images that you used that were not your own and without permission that are the problem here, and the attitude and defensiveness you offer back to their owners and here about having used them. Whether or not any particular customer may or may not expect the exact animal pictured has no bearing on the issue, really.

My choice to never do business with you is of course my own choice and based on my own opinion.

The fact that using images without permission is illegal, however, is far from forcing my own subjective values onto you. You can disagree with a cop or judge about what a speed limit SHOULD be all you want- but in the end you're going to get and be held accountable to the speeding ticket LOL

 

[crespo72]

This guy is a scammer waiting to happen, I can tell by his jargon...

Our email exchange starting from the bottom.
Thanks for the heads up Charles! You rock.

__________

Danny,

I have removed both of those images already about an hour or so ago. As far as using other peoples images, I have a real mixed bag on my website. Many images are from customers who give them to me of their own free will (usually pictures they take of their own animals). Other images are from Wiklipedia.org that are listed as public domain and thereby not covered by DMCA rules, while other images were uploaded by a contractor who worked with my company uploading missing images on my website. That contractor did not follow my express instructions on gathering only free or public domain images, which ultimately was my fault for not thoroughly checking this contractors work. So in theory, yes, I should be removing all images that I do not have express permission to us. However, at this point, I can't remember, nor do I have an easy or quick way of tracking which is which, that is, which are the legal usage images verses the non-legal usage images. Therefore, I will work on a case-by-case basis when violations that I am unaware of come up. So, cleaning up my site of all non-authorized images will be an ongoing process. And of course anyone is free to send me a photo requesting how I can use it with the proper copy write notification.

Thank you,
Robert Crespo
http://www.ReptilesNCritters.com


On Jun 1, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Danny Mendez wrote:

You should probably start by removing all images that don't belong to you as many people are finding their images on your site which is dishonest since you are trying to represent animals you don't have. Please remove these images immediately.


http://www.reptilesncritters.com/colored-babies-amazon-tree-boa.html


http://www.reptilesncritters.com/red-colored-babies-amazon-tree-boa.html

On Jun 1, 2011, at 11:53 AM, ReptilesNCritters.com wrote:

Danny,

I will be happy to honor your request. If you would be so helpful as to paste the exact page of the offending image I would appreciate. I am not sure which images of the Red and Yellow Tree Amazon Tree Boas you mean as I have several of them in my website and servers.

Looking forward to the links you provide so that I can remove the offending images.

Thank you,
Robert Crespo
http://www.ReptilesNCritters.com

Danny, what kind of hypocrite are you? Condemning me on the one hand while posting a PRIVATE email from myself on a public forum like this? I thought a person like yourself would have been above resorting to this kind of tactic? A private email message posted on a public internet forum that is posted with the express purpose of character defamation is illegal.

 

[rjarosek]

Danny, what kind of hypocrite are you? Condemning me on the one hand while posting a PRIVATE email from myself on a public forum like this? I thought a person like yourself would have been above resorting to this kind of tactic? A private email message posted on a public internet forum that is posted with the express purpose of character defamation is illegal.

file a lawsuit then.

 

[Chris Anderson]

A private email message posted on a public internet forum that is posted with the express purpose of character defamation is illegal.

Robert,

Nice try but fair use under US Law stipulates that "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." You own the legal copyright to what you wrote in your email as intellectual property but its use by reproduction in copies for the purpose of criticism and comment, as in this thread, is not an infringement of your copyright.

Chris

 

[John White]

A private email message posted on a public internet forum that is posted with the express purpose of character defamation is illegal.

So, now you are concerned about legalities!?! :lol: Where was this concern when you were stealing photos?

 

[rjarosek]

Robert,

Nice try but fair use under US Law stipulates that "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." You own the legal copyright to what you wrote in your email as intellectual property but its use by reproduction in copies for the purpose of criticism and comment, as in this thread, is not an infringement of your copyright.

Chris

Robert 1+1????

 

[crespo72]

To rjarosek: Very funny, I see the irony here. LOL. By the way, my Facebook photo is just a gag, it's supposed to elicit a chuckle or two if someone has a sense of humor. I am sorry, I speaking to the wrong crowd about humor.

To Chris Anderson: You wrote "You own the legal copyright to what you wrote in your email as intellectual property but its use by reproduction in copies for the purpose of criticism and comment, as in this thread, is not an infringement of your copyright."
So, if I take this statement at face value, why is what I write to someone in private NOT protected, and can be freely distributed to all, but the "creation" by someone in the form of a photograph is protected? No where in my email communication did I give express permission for it's reproduction. Even reporters need to get permission to use a quote for a story or magazine article. I really don't follow the logic of how my PRIVATE emails are public domain but someone else's very PUBLIC photos are protected?

John White: You wrote: "So, now you are concerned about legalities!?! :lol: Where was this concern when you were stealing photos?"
So then, do two wrongs make a right?

 

[Chris Anderson]

To rjarosek: Very funny, I see the irony here. LOL. By the way, my Facebook photo is just a gag, it's supposed to elicit a chuckle or two if someone has a sense of humor. I am sorry, I speaking to the wrong crowd about humor.

Don't worry, its definitely elicited a chuckle or two!

To Chris Anderson: You wrote "You own the legal copyright to what you wrote in your email as intellectual property but its use by reproduction in copies for the purpose of criticism and comment, as in this thread, is not an infringement of your copyright."
So, if I take this statement at face value, why is what I write to someone in private NOT protected, and can be freely distributed to all, but the "creation" by someone in the form of a photograph is protected? No where in my email communication did I give express permission for it's reproduction. Even reporters need to get permission to use a quote for a story or magazine article. I really don't follow the logic of how my PRIVATE emails are public domain but someone else's very PUBLIC photos are protected?

Two differences of note: 1) Fair use does not include use to aid in commercial gain, which is what your use of other's photographs on your website is. 2) Under fair use, you are still required to give proper credit to the copyright holder, which was done for the text of your emails, but, even if they were covered by fair use, not on the photographs on your website.

Chris

 

[FosterHerpetological]

To rjarosek: Very funny, I see the irony here. LOL. By the way, my Facebook photo is just a gag, it's supposed to elicit a chuckle or two if someone has a sense of humor. I am sorry, I speaking to the wrong crowd about humor.

To Chris Anderson: You wrote "You own the legal copyright to what you wrote in your email as intellectual property but its use by reproduction in copies for the purpose of criticism and comment, as in this thread, is not an infringement of your copyright."
So, if I take this statement at face value, why is what I write to someone in private NOT protected, and can be freely distributed to all, but the "creation" by someone in the form of a photograph is protected? No where in my email communication did I give express permission for it's reproduction. Even reporters need to get permission to use a quote for a story or magazine article. I really don't follow the logic of how my PRIVATE emails are public domain but someone else's very PUBLIC photos are protected?

John White: You wrote: "So, now you are concerned about legalities!?! :lol: Where was this concern when you were stealing photos?"
So then, do two wrongs make a right?

Why are you even arguing? You got caught stealing people photos. Man up and take some responsibility.

 

[crespo72]

Why are you even arguing? You got caught stealing people photos. Man up and take some responsibility.

I am taking some responsibility as I am working with everyone one of you folks who have decided to gang up on me. It's very comical, like a DCMA violation feeding frenzy. LOL. For the record, I have conducted a legitimate, non-scamming internet business for several years and only offer what I hope to me high quality merchandise to my customers. My customers range from well respected Zoo's and universities, to the run of the mill exotic pet hobbyist. With the exception of my DCMA violations, there is nothing underhanded about how I conduct my business or treat my customers. In the end, ReptilesNCritters.com will eventually be DCMA violation free, which we are aiming for in the near future. Until then I will "Man up" as you suggest, and take responsibility for my websites content.

 

[NIGRO51]

and only offer what I hope to me high quality merchandise to my customers.

 

[John White]

Until then I will "Man up" as you suggest, and take responsibility for my websites content.

If you are truly taking responsibility for the content on your website you would delete all the photos not taken by yourself or employees. You may also want to double check the scientific names used on your site as many are either completely wrong and/or misspelled.

 

[TARANTULAS.com]

FWIW, I was first alerted to this site's use of a TARANTULAS.com image of an ivory ball python months ago and I sent an email requesting its removal. I am not sure if it was removed upon my demand or if they just removed it when the animal was no longer available. Today I was alerted to the use of one of our tarantula images and when I sent an email demanding it be removed a Robert Crespo wrote back very quickly and was apologetic. He asked for a link to the image/page using our image. He has since replied again that he assures me it will be removed today. I am satisfied with his quick response and promise.

I am not sure why a site would use ANY images that they know are not their own, but Robert Crespo stated in his email that he hired someone to find and add images they needed. He claims his instructions were to avoid other commercial sites. I do not understand the distinction, since whether a site is commercial or not, the images are the property of the photographer and should not be used without permission.

Best regards,

Michael Jacobi
TARANTULAS.com/Northwest Zoological Supply
ExoticFauna.com

 

[crespo72]

If you are truly taking responsibility for the content on your website you would delete all the photos not taken by yourself or employees. You may also want to double check the scientific names used on your site as many are either completely wrong and/or misspelled.

I appreciate your suggestion to take down every photo that I cannot personally verify, but it's not a tenable option at this time. All I can say is that I am working on changing the way we acquire images in the future. We will continue to replace and change our images when permission based images can be found or are provided by my various suppliers. It's often very difficult to obtain images in the first place. Regarding the misspelling of many of the scientific names, I agree that work needs to be done regarding accuracy. Most of these scientific name inaccuracies have been provided to me by my suppliers who may also be unwittingly passing incorrectly spelled scientific names to me. As you know, a website is never finished and work always needs to be done to make it better to keep all of my customers satisfied.

 

[John White]

That's not the story he told me. This is what I was told: "We have a lot of fans that email us pictures all the time and often they don't tell us where these pictures come from."

Robert are you lying to me or Michael? Or both of us?

 

[crespo72]

FWIW, I was first alerted to this site's use of a TARANTULAS.com image of an ivory ball python months ago and I sent an email requesting its removal. I am not sure if it was removed upon my demand or if they just removed it when the animal was no longer available. Today I was alerted to the use of one of our tarantula images and when I sent an email demanding it be removed a Robert Crespo wrote back very quickly and was apologetic. He asked for a link to the image/page using our image. He has since replied again that he assures me it will be removed today. I am satisfied with his quick response and promise.

I am not sure why a site would use ANY images that they know are not their own, but Robert Crespo stated in his email that he hired someone to find and add images they needed. He claims his instructions were to avoid other commercial sites. I do not understand the distinction, since whether a site is commercial or not, the images are the property of the photographer and should not be used without permission.

Best regards,

Michael Jacobi
TARANTULAS.com/Northwest Zoological Supply
ExoticFauna.com

Michael, thank you for your fair and balanced remarks. After these lengthy exchanges with other members of faunaclassified.com today, I am determined to avoid in the future as much as possible both commercial and non-commercial images that I do not get express permission to use for my website.

 

[lauraleellbp]

I am taking some responsibility as I am working with everyone one of you folks who have decided to gang up on me. It's very comical, like a DCMA violation feeding frenzy. LOL. For the record, I have conducted a legitimate, non-scamming internet business for several years and only offer what I hope to me high quality merchandise to my customers. My customers range from well respected Zoo's and universities, to the run of the mill exotic pet hobbyist. With the exception of my DCMA violations, there is nothing underhanded about how I conduct my business or treat my customers. In the end, ReptilesNCritters.com will eventually be DCMA violation free, which we are aiming for in the near future. Until then I will "Man up" as you suggest, and take responsibility for my websites content.

As it's easy to see from other BOI threads about your business dating at least back to 2008 citing the exact same issue, time will tell if you actually WILL take responsibility this time around. Or if you'll just go right back to your habitual behavior (or lack of oversight- same difference) as soon as "the heat is off."

I personally find it hard to believe it was a single subcontractor who has been taking these photos from other places and repeatedly posting them on your site for three years now.

It still sounds to me like you have zero respect for the breeders and owners whose work you are effectively taking credit for and stealing by using their photos to represent your own stock, you see this all as some minor technicality. Perhaps you do have your customers' permission to use their photos, but given the irresponsible attitude you've displayed about the entire issue to date in this thread, I personally have my own doubts on that point.

It really doesn't take that much of an investment of time or money to take and use your own photos.

 

[crespo72]

That's not the story he told me. This is what I was told: "We have a lot of fans that email us pictures all the time and often they don't tell us where these pictures come from."

Robert are you lying to me or Michael? Or both of us?

John, I am not lying to either of you. Actually, both of what I told you and Michael is 100% true. When you come across a placeholder image on my website, the detail record page shows text in red with a link for people to email me a photo. For example, notice what it says under the following placeholder image:
http://www.reptilesncritters.com/python-albino-males.html
The text reads:
"ReptilesNCritters.com needs your help! We have a need for high quality pictures for all the reptiles and amphibians on our web site. Here's where you can help us out: If you're seeing only a placeholder image above this paragraph and you have a picture of this reptile or amphibian then please email me and as an incentive we will give you full name credit as well as a link to your own web site or blog."

As a result I get lots of images from customers all the time that I assume are legitimate to use, but obviously are not since some customers apparently grab content from other websites without their permission or knowledge.

Additionally, I did hire an overseas contractor last year to add several hundred images of which an unknown number have been used without the owners permission. So to recap, what I told both yourself and Michael is truthful and accurate.