11-07-2017 12:06 PM
A couple of points...
The "website" you are looking at is actually just an image-search. It would be like going to Google ... do a search for something... for example "pancakes"... and then wonder how all those pancakes got posted to Google. The answer is... they didn't. Google searched for pages that had the word "pancake" on the page ... and then provided a list of all those pages. Suddenly you have photos from pages where people took photos of their breakfast pancakes, recipe websites with pancakes, restaurants that serve pancakes for breakfast, companies that make pancake mix that you can buy in the store...and the list goes on.
This is the same thing... only it's Bing, and instead of pancakes, it's Budweiser Cyldesdales.
The image isn't posted to Bing... Bing is simply providing a list of all the places where it found images which are of Budweiser Clydesdales.
If you do the Budwieiser Clydesdale search, then pick the first image, it'll show you the webpage where it found that image (and offer to let you go to that page directly). But then pick the next image ... it'll probably be a completely different webpage. And so on...
So some of these images were found at Flickr (a popular image hosting website). Some of them are newspaper websites. I see one on the list that is from TripAdvisor (a travel website).
BTW, I did not actually find your exact image (I found several that appear similar ... just not the one you posted above. That's not to say that it isn't there... there are pages and pages and pages of search results and I only looked through the first few.
So the real question is... where did you post the image? Did you post this on Facebook? Did you post it on any photo gallery such as Flickr or Instagram or... the list goes on and on. If you posted this image ANYWHERE, then all these search engines such as Google and Bing will crawl the web and index everything they find.
Once you post it... people can find it. I've had people contact me to ask for permission to use photos that I've posted to the web. They found these images because they were searching these major Internet search engine sites such as Google or Bing.
Go back to Bing and search for your exact image... then select it. You should see a link that takes you to the webpage where they found it. This may be a webpage where you originally posted it.
Side note: There are revserve image-search websites such as TinEye.com. I pointed TinEye at the image you posted here and asked it to do a reverse search... it found nothing (it cannot find your exact image posted anywhere else). Google also has a way of doing a reverse image search.
Sometimes, however, if you post an image that someone else likes... they'll copy your image and post it somewhere else. This has nothing to do with Canon ... or even the website that hosted the image.
DMCA laws allow you to have content removed if someone is infringing your rights. I'm not a lawyer so I can't acurately describe how it works, but basically you issue something called a "take down notice" and the operator of the website (who usually is not the person who posted the copy of your work... if someone uploads something to Instagram and claims it is their own work, Instagram has no way to know that they are not the owner). Basically they take your word for it... but the other party has the right to object (otherwise you could order the take-down of things you don't actually own and that would infringe other peoples' rights.) If they do object, the content goes back up again and it's up to you to go after the third party directly (the website where the image was found has legal immunity as long as the honor your take-down request ... even if the other party demands that they put the content back up.)
This quickly gets to the point where it's not worth it. You get an implicit copyright of any image you legitimately photographed yourself. But this is a "copyright" and not a "registered copyright". To "register" a copyright, you file a copy of the image with the US copyright office and pay a small fee. Now it's "registered". If someone infringes a "registered" work then the fines can be worth quite a bit (thousands).
But if someone infringes a non-registered "copyright" work, then the generally the maximum you can collect is whatever the going rate would be for your work.... and THAT really gets tricky because now you have to prove that you really do make that much for your work. I cannot claim that one of my images is worth thousands of dollars unless I can show some evidence that people really will pay thousands of dollars for my images (and I can't do that becuase nobody has ever paid me thousands of dollars for any of my images... much to my disappointment). Most photographers make very little per image... this means that the "fine" for violating the copyright might be some paultry amount ... maybe $15 (it would highy unlikely to be even, say, $50... without some proof that you regularly get paid that much per image). And nobody wants to hire a lawyer at the hourly rate to collect such a small amount of money.
So in most of the online photographer forums that I frequent... when this comes up, and it turns out someone really did steal someone else's work (it happens all the time), the general advice is (a) if it wasn't a "registered" copyright, then it's probably not worth persuing and (b) learn a lesson and be more careful how you share images as well as registering the copyright on any images you really care about.
Some people sell photos commercially and it's hard to sell an image without showing a sample of the work. Some photographers will only show a small size image... but you pay if you want the larger resolution version. Some photographers will show a much larger resolution image... but they put a watermark on it so that you wont want to use it unless the watermark is removed, etc.
11-07-2017 01:20 PM
Thank you TCampbell, I do understand what you are saying. When I click on the image it is saying it was from Canon website.