For some reason, out there in the electronic interweb world, people either professional or not, have the idea that if an image is there, it is 'free use'. This is especially if it appears in a Google image search result. Google has tried to combat this with a little fine print 'copyright may apply' which is easily overlooked, if understood at all. Copyright of a photograph remains with the person who pressed the shutter button to capture the image, and does not matter who owned the camera, or who was paying the photographer. Copyright of the photograph also remains for 70 years after the death of the photographer, and then is passed to next of kin. Even if the photograph is sold as prints, or electronically, this never transfers ownership of the copyright. I have however heard of limited agreements where the photographer sold the copyright, which was only the case because the photographer was not interested in the end result at all, and paid handsomely for the work.
There is still the strange myth alive and well that a photographer will be happy with exposure by any media if they are credited, and Photographers should be happy for the privilege of having our work exposed. As flattering as it may be, there is nothing further from the truth, as only amateurs would really be the one's needing this ego rub. The automatically perceived notion that exposure has some financial gain to a photographer is an extremely selfish and naive attitude that too many low budget web sites believe justifies their actions. But then take the individual who claims the photograph from another, and this becomes theft of intellectual talent and is quite simply committing fraud. Yet this type of person for some reason believes they are immune or can get away with it, and how they find peace in their mind to undertake such an act is beyond me. There was one famous case in the U.S. where a Photographer used another's work to promote her Wedding Photography website. The Photographer was found out, very easily, and not only flamed by the industry, but lost all credibility to the point of shutting down her business, even after she apologised. It is a pity that I can't take the same action towards the individual who stole my work... the combination of a very generic name and no contact details on the MarineTraffic website returns no supporting evidence I can use to point blame.
Since finding the stolen images, MarineTraffic has removed them and allowed me to re-submit. But the person gets away with a crime that is all too silent, damnit!
