/headdesk... copyright theft

Business By Makonakins Updated 25 Jun 2012 , 7:05pm by Bonnie151

Makonakins Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 5:15pm
post #31 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes


I was responding the very public aspect of calling someone out on THEIR blog or THEIR FB page, as noted by the OP---not HERE on CC in the Business Forum. I think people would see negative comments and question on THOSE as way to close to home and be inclined to respond strongly & negatively as a matter of self defense.



Fair enough. But my opinion on this matter and I think I said it before, is that if a business is using these public sites then they invite comments and discussion - whether they be positive or negative... or even neutral.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

But I will say that from the OP's post, I imagine him/her posting on cake blogs & FB pages in a way that IS perceived as offensive by the business owner(s) and that he/she gets less than positive feedback for being so............informative.




And since the thread has derailed a bit from my actual intention of finding out how other people in the business handle copyright theft and is focusing more on my actions and what had initially sparked this post then I might as quote, for transparency, what I said in the comment of the photo on the bakers FB page - which has now been deleted (but luckily is saved in my FB activty log):

"Very cool icon_biggrin.gif But I was wondering about the whole copyright issue... did the baker get permission? :/"

But anyhoo getting back to the actual reason for me posting:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Makonakins

So what do you all do? Do you just let it slide and no longer comment on photos/work of this nature for fear of the backlash. Or do you try and make people aware (bakery business owners and customers) of the issue?




So far I think from the replies it seems most people would steer clear and not involve themselves.

Kk good to know thumbs_up.gif

Oh and forgot to say Crazy-Gray congrats on your permission icon_biggrin.gif Bet you're really excited - hope you'll post pictures so we can see. icon_smile.gif

jason_kraft Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 5:21pm
post #32 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

I was responding the very public aspect of calling someone out on THEIR blog or THEIR FB page, as noted by the OP---not HERE on CC in the Business Forum. I think people would see negative comments and question on THOSE as way to close to home and be inclined to respond strongly & negatively as a matter of self defense.



I would think the more common response to a post perceived as negative on someone's FB page or blog would be to simply delete the offending post.

carmijok Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 5:33pm
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pearl645

Oh my. Thanks for clearning up. I have done 2 wilton character cakes and never noticed "for home use only". I am now concerned about people bringing photos of cakes they got from online for their wedding cake. We don't even have Cottage Food Laws here. Anyone can start a cake business from home all with just a 2hr tv lecture at the Health office and a Health badge is issued right after. No inspection whatsoever.




You are lucky. However I don't think I'd be too concerned about someone bringing in a design from an online site. If it doesn't have licensed characters then you really have no problem. If brides or customers want a certain look then that's what they should get. NO two cakes will look exactly the same no matter who does it.

If you're going to post picture on the internet of your work then you stand a very good chance of being copied...or used for inspiration...same thing in my book. Who has the time or money to chase down individuals who copy a cake design off the internet? It's when they use your actual picture claiming it as their own that is problematic...and that can usually be taken care of.

BlakesCakes Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 5:52pm
post #34 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

I was responding the very public aspect of calling someone out on THEIR blog or THEIR FB page, as noted by the OP---not HERE on CC in the Business Forum. I think people would see negative comments and question on THOSE as way to close to home and be inclined to respond strongly & negatively as a matter of self defense.


I would think the more common response to a post perceived as negative on someone's FB page or blog would be to simply delete the offending post.




Yes, I imagine that most would delete it, BUT, there is the time frame where it's visible, can be captured--just as the OP proudly mentions in an above post--and may be responded to by others.
Followers of the blog or FB page then question why there has been no response or why the post has just disappeared.

I've seen posts on here that have received less than favorable responses--responses that include quotes from the original. The poster deletes the entire post, but the quotes in the responses remain.

So, the internet ether trail can still be tracked, sometimes, even when the delete button has been used.

Some people would choose to confront their attacker, but we are becoming a society of people who just hit the delete button for anything and everything.................

Rae

Makonakins Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 7:01pm
post #35 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Yes, I imagine that most would delete it, BUT, there is the time frame where it's visible, can be captured--just as the OP proudly mentions in an above post--and may be responded to by others.




Proudly? Are you serious? Sounds like you have an axe to grind what with all the underhanded comments.

I said it was lucky it was saved in my activity log (I don't have control over how FB records these things...), and therefore I could quote what I said accurately since a few had asked how I had phrased my inquiry to the baker.

jason_kraft Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 7:15pm
post #36 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Yes, I imagine that most would delete it, BUT, there is the time frame where it's visible, can be captured--just as the OP proudly mentions in an above post--and may be responded to by others.
Followers of the blog or FB page then question why there has been no response or why the post has just disappeared.



On your own FB page or blog, you control the narrative. It is your prerogative to "confront" your "attacker", but such an exchange would be much more visible to followers than if a post were simply deleted, and a combative style is likely to put off potential customers (if the page in question is for a business). Of course, the best response would be to address the concerns head on in a respectful manner, even if the question/comment is rude.

You can tell a lot about people by how they respond to criticism or even how they address points in a debate. For example, popular businesses who have a lot of positive reviews on independent sites like Yelp or Angieslist will usually have at least a few negatives. How the business owners respond to these reviews is a great indicator of how they treat customers. On several occasions I have gone with businesses with slightly lower ratings and/or avoided businesses with high ratings because of these responses.

BlakesCakes Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 7:28pm
post #37 of 50

Okay..........

Facts are:
You've been a member for 18 months and apparently content to just lurk for 17.5 of those months, soaking up information but choosing not to/not being able to/not being comfortable to contribute to the site.

Of your 13 forum posts, 10 of them have been to this post.

You started this post by wanting to vent.

You vented.

You've received some succor and some backlash.

I have not posted ONE thing that was "backhanded". EVERYTHING I've posted has been direct.

It is, however, "backhanded", to post on a public FB page, ""Very cool Very Happy But I was wondering about the whole copyright issue... did the baker get permission? :/" while trying to draw out information with a cute smiley face icon_biggrin.gif

You don't like what I've posted because I strongly disagree with HOW you did what you did. I might actually choose to ask the same question of someone, but I would do it as a fellow professional and I would do it PRIVATELY.

You're grinding an axe and I'm grinding an ax. It's to be expected in a controversy. Big deal.

Rae

jason_kraft Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 7:38pm
post #38 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Facts are:
You've been a member for 18 months and apparently content to just lurk for 17.5 of those months, soaking up information but choosing not to/not being able to/not being comfortable to contribute to the site.



This is a prime example of the type of response that would cause me to ignore a business's high ratings and look elsewhere. If you want to respond to someone, comment on what they say and not who they are personally. I have gotten quite a few PMs from people who are afraid to post because of this type of bullying.

jason_kraft Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 7:52pm
post #39 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makonakins

So far I think from the replies it seems most people would steer clear and not involve themselves.



In the context of a FB page or blog I probably wouldn't comment about copyright unless it related directly to the subject of the post. If anything, a private message would be more appropriate, framed as an FYI message with softer language (e.g. "If you haven't done so already, you may want to consider...") instead of specifically asking a question.

Makonakins Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 8:05pm
post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes


You've been a member for 18 months and apparently content to just lurk for 17.5 of those months, soaking up information but choosing not to/not being able to/not being comfortable to contribute to the site.



Check your maths, I haven't been a member for this long. "Member Since Dec 08, 2011".
And I'm not sure why the length of my membership would be an issue. True, I've lurked for a long while before I even made an account because this was just a hobby - but now I'm becoming more serious about my craft and wanted to join in. Fair enough, perhaps one of my first posts shouldn't have been about such a taboo subject as copyright theft, since it has obviously touched a few nerves, but I'm not going to apologise for it or for asking other member's opinions on how they deal with these situations in this industry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes


I have not posted ONE thing that was "backhanded". EVERYTHING I've posted has been direct.



I disagree, the earlier comment about you stating I was "proud" that I was able to quote what I had said proves my point; inferring that I was "out to get them". When in fact, as I said, it was to give some transparency to the situation. However I do understand a lot of different emotions can be deduced from text.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes


You don't like what I've posted because I strongly disagree with HOW you did what you did. I might actually choose to ask the same question of someone, but I would do it as a fellow professional and I would do it PRIVATELY.



No I don't like what you've posted because a lot of it is (from my pov) very rude and hostile. I accept that this is your opinion and how you would personally deal with this situation (talking to them privately) is actually why I posted; to find out other people's views and how they do things.

I can also understand how you may view my original FB comment as a bit "off" now that you have pointed it out (there probably should have been some extra punctuation marks to separate the two sentences, the feedback and then the question, so there was no confusion). But in all honesty I was genuinely curious if they had got permission. Especially since they had used an official logo on the photo, and have done so in the past.

ladyren Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 8:36pm
post #41 of 50

The OP states he/she was curious about how the baker got permission to copyright, from what I just read. I can see the confusion, then. Commenting on FB "did the baker get permission," is different from asking *how* someone gets permission. One comes across as accusatory, the other as a genuine question. (I just realized I was wrong in this and that the OP was not curious about how. I apologize.)

Typed words do not have the inflection, the body language or the subtle cues that face to face conversation have. It is very easy for things to get skewed and emotional. It is therefore highly important to be careful how we say and phrase things.

I have read most of the threads on this issue, and I admit to PMing some offlist with my opinions, mostly out of fear from internet bullying and the "CC police.". I take offense at being lectured and talked at about things of which the offending lecturer is not aware I may know. When a poster starts a thread with condescension, calling out others about their business practices, I automatically get turned off. One such thread happened recently, where someone opened up the discussion with very derisive statements about the evils of copyright infringement, Whereas I might have agreed had the OP tackled the subject in a helping manner, I instead have written off everything else that OP says, because I lost all respect for him/her. We are all adults here; no one needs to be dressed down, lectured to or treated like a child. I will listen to you if you treat me as an equal. I will not respect you if you come at me like I am your child...

BlakesCakes Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 8:40pm
post #42 of 50

You're right. I miscalculated................6 months. Sorry for the error.

No worries, Jason. Had I received a PM about my first responding post, I would not have continued to respond in the forum.......oh, and I get PMs all the time encouraging me to continue to speak up, not shut up.

And now after having thrown plenty of vitriol my way, which I am apparently NOT supposed to respond to, both you and the OP seem to think that a "softer"/private/or less "off" query would have been the better road.

So..........Image

Rae

Makonakins Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 8:48pm
post #43 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyren

The OP states he/she was curious about how the baker got permission to copyright, from what I just read. I can see the confusion, then. Commenting on FB "did the baker get permission," is different from asking *how* someone gets permission.




Nope, I've actually never said that. I never asked "how" they got permission or how to get permission - as I already know the answer to this question through my research of this topic.

I was curious to know if they had got permission. And the backlash that came from asking that question on FB, lead me to post here about how other's handle copyright infringement.

Hope that clarifies things? birthday.gif

Edit: No probs Ladyren^^ icon_biggrin.gif Didn't see your edit before I posted. icon_redface.gif

ladyren Posted 12 Jun 2012 , 8:50pm
post #44 of 50

Yes, I had already edited my post above.

sfandm Posted 24 Jun 2012 , 9:24pm
post #45 of 50

I just finished reading thru these posts and I have NOT been a member for very long either, but I will state a FACT about copyright infringement. This happened to a forum member of a very different line of a home business. This particular lady had a great website where she sold a TON of wrapper sets, basically you paid to download jpgs, or pictures, which you then put into a software program and then printed off. They were used to overwrap chocolate bars, Hershey miniatures, and alot of other items. This has been a very GOOD business for me personally. I did quite well in Texas.

In saying this, she had a certain category on her website that was listed as "Fake" sets. She sold a lot of different sets, from the 'girl who explores' to the 'yellow sponge' to plenty of Walts characters. I actually purchased several sets from her at $10-$13 per set.

One day, all 13,000+ members of this forum were told that she was not in business anymore. Why? She was fined an exhorbenent amount of money for copyright infringement. Had to close her business and website. The lawsuit cleaned her out.

Another true story, this happened at an indoor flea market in Texas several years ago, and my daughter who worked there at the time witnessed it firsthand. Several deacl or sticker businesses who sold their wares inside were "raided" one Saturday afternoon. Decals, cutting machines, software programs, etc were confiscated by the licensing officials walking around. These people were also fined and some had to close their doors to future business.

All I can say is: if it is licensed and you can see it on tv, in books, magazines, have to pay extra money, or can find it on the internet, steer clear from producing it. It's not worth it.

My 2 cents

Bluehue Posted 25 Jun 2012 , 2:39pm
post #46 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

So..........Image

Rae




"ouch" ........... good grief, that looks painful Rae.

Bluehue

Paperfishies Posted 25 Jun 2012 , 3:04pm
post #47 of 50

I mind my own business is what I do and let them deal with any fall out that may come their way.

vpJane Posted 25 Jun 2012 , 3:07pm
post #48 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paperfishies

I mind my own business is what I do and let them deal with any fall out that may come their way.




Ditto. It's how it should be. MYOB...mind your own business.

Paperfishies Posted 25 Jun 2012 , 3:21pm
post #49 of 50

LOL...I barely have enough time most days to get everything done that needs to get done...I sure as hell don't have time to have my nose in everyone elses affairs and business dealings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vpJane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paperfishies

I mind my own business is what I do and let them deal with any fall out that may come their way.



Ditto. It's how it should be. MYOB...mind your own business.


Bonnie151 Posted 25 Jun 2012 , 7:05pm
post #50 of 50

I know you don't want to name names, but there are several well known UK cake decorators who DO have a variety of copyright permissions, so if it's one of the ones I'm thinking of, they're fine.

Quote by @%username% on %date%

%body%