Ricoh Pentax update: confidence restored, resolution and conclusion

Ming Thein Official Letter

Firstly – and a lot of you will probably consider this ironic – I’d like to attempt to retain some objectivity in this matter. Here are the facts:

  • The developer/ agency at the instruction of the locally appointed Indonesian representative, and without any protest from them, used one of my images without permission or licensing.
  • The Indonesian representative – or claimed representative of Ricoh Pentax – was clearly aware of the matter and removed the image together with an unacceptable reply of “The decision to used your picture are my decision to fulfill my target to make my company’s website looks wonderful, therefore please accept my deepest apology.”
  • Ricoh Pentax HQ was informed through every possible channel I have had access to. Though they were not directly responsible, an agent claiming to represent their brand and acting as their brand was. However, it is the responsibility of the principal as any person who sees that representation would assume in good faith that it is affiliated with the principal.

[Read more…]

Name and shame: ‘Pentax Ricoh Indonesia’ stole my image UPDATE: resolved.

GR

One of my readers (thank you) brought this to my attention earlier today. It is with great disappointment that I have to do this, because clearly the company involved – AW Photo, unclear whether they are distributor or subsidiary or something else to do with Pentax Ricoh but claiming to be ‘Pentax Ricoh Indonesia’ – has used one of my images for commercial promotion purposes without permission or credit, from my review here. Note how the watermark is still in place – how could their web designer have failed to notice that? On top of that, the page was apparently last updated in October 2013 – that’s eight months of unauthorised use, and eight months in which HQ could have done something.

[Read more…]