i have found in animation section a lot of fake samples which not done with by the sellers themselves…my advice to each seller and buyer on fiverr to report these kind of gigs so we can make the platform clean again
20-30% of GIGs are fake and frauds. Nobody has time to do that kind of purge. You have to present evidence, links, photo to CS to get him removed.
I know for a fact that there’s a brand new feature coming our way that will help combat this phenomenon.
Be patient. It’s just a few weeks away.
That would be great! Because if you type in the search my type of illustration (fantasy horror) you get more like 80% of fake sellers. It’s crazy. I’ve tried reporting them with evidences, but it didn’t seem to do much.
A few days ago I ordered a logo from a new seller and then many problems started (delays, no response to my messages, very low quality and irrelevant to the information I sent to the seller, etc.). The last thing I noticed by accident was that the seller has copied-pasted the samples from a top rated seller. I sent the evidence to CS, my order was cancelled and and i got refunded but the seller still exists with the same profile and samples. So, I am not sure what to conclude about the actions of the CS.
AFAIK it’s a feature for the video and animation category for now. Although typically when something is successfully launched in one category, it is implemented globally.
Well, let’s hope it will be implemented in the illustrator category too in the futur, because it really needs it.
What is important to note here that while you ar a person and individual are normal and have no bad intention, and your report is your honest complaint, Fiverr CS only knows that you are purple letter A human under tag “lefterisrontou”.
From their perspective you could be:
a) honest person who wants justice
b) trying to take out the competition
c) making YT video about it
d) bored in life so why not
For this reason if you want your report to be taken seriously and swiftly it is best to leave out emotions from your report.
My report is usually like this.
This person is using images from here: Logos from here: videos from here: description from here: with links behind each (if applicable).
As much as I trust Frank’s knowledge about this “new feature” the only way we will be able to trust that this new feature works are by stripping down the numbers of logo sellers. That is a most infected category and right now if I go there in just one search page I can find half with images from stock sites.
In last 27 days 10000 new logo gigs, 8000 new sellers. But the actual number is much higher because number goes up by 1000 and then goes down by 300 (new sellers being removed by the CS).
I can’t say what it is or how it will work.
What I can say is that it will indirectly help combat this problem (the fake videos, illegal templates, and automatic animation services) that plagues the video category.
And when I say indirectly, I mean that the cleanse will be a by-product of the feature’s main function.
I’ve said too much
Regarding logo category, it has to be checked manually.
You have basic and average frauds that just take logos and rotate them around the photo or put them in 3D mockup, that is easy to trace. The “smart” ones that put stock footage as background of “their” logo are much harder to trace because image search is only focusing on the image, not the logo.
So in those cases what I do is manually extract the logo from the photo, convert it to one color image then put it back in to search to trace the original.
So I assume it’s an automated checker for video files to see if they exist (or very similar content exists) already online somewhere, like they already have for gig images (though I assume the gig images one only checks after a gig has been edited/added so that’s probably a reason why there might still be a lot of gig images that are copied - since those gigs could have been created before that feature was added). Maybe the video checker checks every so many frames or has a checksum on frames. I assume the automated video checker will also only check when a gig is edited/added.
I don’t know why it would get rid of automatic animation services though - maybe it will if they’re using videos that aren’t unique, though automated ones aren’t necessarily against the TOS I think if they have the rights.
That’s not what this is.
Please keep in mind that A LOT of those gigs are just duplicates from all the “inspired” sellers that think publishing 6 gigs with different tags and titles will make them millions.
All the gigs I have reported haven’t been taken down and it’s been a while, at this point I don’t even bother.
If it’s not an automated checker maybe it’s an easier way to flag content or maybe some method that requires the content creator to prove it’s theirs when it’s uploaded, like uploading the source files.
No, nope, not gonna work. I have source files of Nike, Adidas, and most of the high end logos around the world, proves nothing.
Reporting doesn’t do anything.
The reason they are not doing anything about it is because people would report successful sellers into oblivion, in order to take them down.
Malicious attacks are only prevented if CS ignores flags. The only flags they seem to act upon are blatant copyright infringement like people Disney characters or minions etc.
@uk1000 nope. It’s something way simpler than that.
Yes but it could be a combination of things - for that I was talking mostly about video since the new thing was said to be in the video & animation category first. For still images they could look at the source file the user uploads and compare the images to existing images.
Though if they’re doing stuff to stop copied gig images/videos maybe they should do something to automatically stop big sections of gig descriptions being copied too, since that shouldn’t be too difficult. Though maybe they don’t think that’s really important.
Now if we could only weed out the substandard writers selling here…
Maybe it wouldn’t work for logos, but it could work for other visual art categories… but I would be in deep trouble if this would be implemented, since I don’t keep the source file for most of my drawings. If I won’t need them or post them anywhere, I don’t bother keeping them.
Then what’s the point of having the feature available? I always provide links to the works being stolen anyway so it’s not like they’re random reports.