Canadian anti-piracy outfit pirates photos for its website

What are the anti-piracy people supposed to do? They trusted the web design firm and apparently were let down. Should the site owner have to vet the content again?<p>I was on a site buying icons the other day and it occurred to me. There is no way for me to know for sure if this icon I am buying is being sold by the original author. Sure.. I have proof of purchase but if the guy is reselling without permission I have no idea where it leaves me.<p>Which brings us back to this. Photos from an image bank were apparently used. Well.. anyone can be at fault for putting the images in. Naive intern is just as likely as some rip-off merchant.<p>I disagree with what the Anti-Piracy people do but I sympathize if they had nothing to do this and were let down by designers / rogue image reseller.

This reminds me of when the Conference Board of Canada was caught copying content for its copyright policy paper:<p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/think-tanks-approach-to-hollywood-copy-that/article4211630/" rel="nofollow">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/think-tanks-approa...</a>

This seems common, someone should come up with a name for the phenomenon, similar to Muphry's Law: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law</a>

Wow, just like this incident: <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2013/01/29/3678851.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2013/01/29/3678851.ht...</a>

I have to admit to a bit of schadenfreude whenever I see these "Copyright-Troll-Bites-Dog" stories; but I think as it keeps happening again and again I can't help but think that they just show a glimpse into human psychology en masse. A person may stop pirating content, but the nature of the internet guarantees that people will continue to do so.<p>Back when I was a hardcore pirate, (read: poorer than I am now, which is pretty fucking broke) I would download Gigs and Gigs of movies and music that I would almost never watch/listen to. I just found it soothing knowing that I had Terribytes of interesting data; all categorized, indexed and organized, and that could never be taken away from me if Content Producer A got into a corporate pissing match with Content Distributor X.

This headline just took me 45 seconds to parse.

something similar happened here in Italy/other countries... anti piracy advertising stoled music<p><a href="http://torrentfreak.com/rights-group-fined-for-not-paying-artist-for-anti-piracy-ad-120717/" rel="nofollow">http://torrentfreak.com/rights-group-fined-for-not-paying-ar...</a><p>oddly this article is not related...

How much, and in what ways do I have to modify an image (add features, delete features, change aspect) in order to make sure I don't get sued because I am using an image I found on the internet to create something useful for others?<p>If I can get sued for doing such a thing, certainly there has to be a law outlining it? Or is it the wild west like: "the cowboy with the fastest gun/lawyer gets the pesos".

Torrent freak should be auto banned.