January 12, 2005

Mary's Dairy Sucks and She Can Go Suck It

POST #    1514

I went to Mary's Dairy back in May and loved it. Then, they put up their website using my images without my consent. So...Mary's Dairy and Mary's Dairy and Chocolate Bar can suck it! See, there is this little thing called a Creative Commons License that I've attached to my site, which they seem to ignore on their site. Sure, they credit the photo to me, but last time I checked, their site is commercial and they didn't get my consent. Lest you think I didn't contact them, I did. No response.

So, even though Mary's Dairy seems to be doing successful business, and seem to be opening up a new store - Mary's Dairy and Chocolate Bar - in the East Village soon, Mary's Dairy sucks. And their construction workers were working late into the night.

You would think they could offer to pay for my photos. A token fee, perhaps, or even ask to use them. Nope, nothing. Or, you think they could just take their own photos. No, that seems too difficult.

Posted by tien mao in Food/Drink, Rants at 8:06 AM

 

 

wow. you should send them a cease and desist letter asking them to either compensate you or take them down.

Posted by: girlwonder at January 12, 2005 8:47 AM

sue their butts for free ice cream.

seriously, though, you really should send them a cease and desist letter.

Posted by: corie at January 12, 2005 9:05 AM

Wow, that just seems plain freakin' lazy on their part. Ignoring your efforts to contact them is just completely unprofessional.

For what it's worth, I thought they were over-priced.

Posted by: astrid [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 9:37 AM

Is there a blogger beatdown squad that could swoop into action?

Posted by: Dan Dickinson [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 9:55 AM

Shall I contact my lawyer for you? She doesn't practice professionally, but she might be interested.

Posted by: Matthew Caldecutt at January 12, 2005 10:13 AM

been there once... way overpriced. I hope you keep after them.

Posted by: christina at January 12, 2005 10:14 AM

you should make an arrangement so you get free ice cream for life. every week after croxley's you can stop in for a sundae. then again...you might have a heart attack by age 30 on that diet...so, maybe not.

Posted by: yp at January 12, 2005 10:15 AM

i would love to get free ice cream whenever i want. that would ideal, but obviously unhealthy. i just can't believe they didn't bother attempting to contact me or reply when i contacted them. and if i did get free ice cream, then i would become like kramer when he got his free coffee.

if a blog smackdown team, this would be a perfect target. i don't know that i care enough to acutally use a lawyer, but maybe i'll send them another email.

Posted by: tien [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 10:44 AM

starting today i am officially BOYCOTTING mary's dairy

Posted by: rachelle at January 12, 2005 11:02 AM

come on! you have only contacted them once. if you want action you need to keep up with it yo! (we all know you are lazy, but sometimes you can put that aside)

Posted by: shannan at January 12, 2005 11:41 AM

yes, everyone should boycott mary's dairy.

true, only one attempt at contacting, but what do you want? i'm busy and lazy.

Posted by: tien [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 11:46 AM

tien: i am surprised that you say boycott when you know they are the only place that sells krispy kreme donuts topped with icecream. --oops, didnt mean to remind you.

Posted by: shannan at January 12, 2005 11:55 AM

Last week I took a photo of their new place under construction. Now I'm glad I never put it online.

Posted by: joe at January 12, 2005 11:56 AM

yeah, but their krispy kreme doughnuts were stale. i could just buy some myself and make it at home. then, i could heat the doughnuts and they would be even better than the crap at mary's dairy.

Posted by: tien [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 11:58 AM

My friend I would be careful what you say about this establishment. You see, your post is rather libelous against the good name of the company. Yes they may not have paid you for your pictures, but you have no right to inquire as to how much they pay their people, etc. Your mere suggestion that they do not pay minimum wage could end up costing you thousands in atty fees.
I would edit this post if I were you.

Posted by: lawyer@yahoo.com at January 12, 2005 12:17 PM

Sue their ass! Definitely send a letter in writing at least.

Posted by: G.R.O. at January 12, 2005 12:20 PM

i was acutally talking about the construction workers. not the workers at the actual store. but i'll edit it anyway. thanks.

Posted by: tien [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 12, 2005 12:20 PM

wouldn't they have to send you a cease and desist letter if they didn't like your web content first?? I wouldn't sweat it... Ahhh the anonymity of the internet...

Posted by: chris ives at January 12, 2005 4:46 PM

Man they totally deserve to get sued. I mean how hard is it to take your own picture or ask for permission to use someone's. Bad form.

Posted by: Keith at January 12, 2005 5:30 PM

I was totally thinking of Kramer when I read this post...let us know..the Blog Squad has got your back and everything.

Posted by: CJ at January 12, 2005 5:48 PM

Blatant. Tien, as a practical matter, have you tried contacting the place that's hosting the photos on the Mary Dairy site?

http://www.sumosite.com/marysdairynyc/images/marysdairy1.jpg

http://www.sumosite.com/

Of course, that may be useless, becasue, if I had to guess, I'd say someone at sumo is the webmaster for Mary Dairy and is calling the shot. But, ya never know.

Posted by: Marie at January 13, 2005 2:57 PM

hmm, good point marie, i didn't think about that. i'm just going to write them another email and i'll see what happens from there.

Posted by: tien [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 13, 2005 3:08 PM

i like how they say "courtesy of tienmao.com" as if you gave them the pictures. you should request that they at least change it to "stolen from tienmao.com"--that would be more honest!

Posted by: katie at January 13, 2005 11:04 PM

Silly Tien. Don't you know information wants to be free - and that includes your photos? I'm sure every single blogga who has grabbed a photo from say the Post or Times website has compensated the photogs as well, right? You work for Gothamist, don't you Tien? Have they cleared or paid for every single photo they've posted? Surely they have as they are also a commercial site. Copyright is an antiquated notion in the digital age. If you can't deal with that - you shouldn't be on the web in the first place.

Posted by: the internet at January 15, 2005 11:29 AM

OH, SNAP!

Posted by: Adam at January 16, 2005 8:39 PM

replace your photos with a couple of php files that redirect to something unsavory ...

or replace those particular photos with curdled milk, etc.

Posted by: Joel at January 17, 2005 12:07 PM

Just a point to clear up: Any time Gothamist has received an email asking for us to not use their photos, we've complied. It's a slippery slope, but we're more than willing to respond. Which is the difference in this situation.

Posted by: Jen at January 18, 2005 8:47 AM

So Gothamist is only guilty of stealing photos if they get caught? Otherwise, you do nothing to secure the right to use the photo on your commerical site? worse yet - unlike Mary's Dairy, Gothamist doesn't even bother giving credit to the photographer or the site from which the photo was stolen.

So yes - there is a difference here. Mary's stole photos and credited Tien. Then either ignored his email to cease and desist or just don;t check their email. Gothamist - which Tien also works for - steals photos, gives no credit to source and hopes no one catches them. However, it they are caught, they'll gladly take the stolen photo off their site.

Either way it's spun - both Mary's and Gothamist (using Tien's reasoning above) are guilty of copyright infringement. Simply removing the photo once caught does not change the fact EVERY photo (accorrding to Tien's arguement) that is not in public domain MUST be cleared by a commercial site. Otherwise, Mary's has as much right to use Tien's photos as Gothamist does for photos nicked from the Post, Times, etc. sites.

Posted by: the internet at January 18, 2005 10:13 AM

Post a comment

 




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Previous : Dangerous Snowman   |  Main   |   Next :  9 West 57th St.
 
Powered by Movable Type