There is no copyright prevention if the image appears on screen and it doesn't have to be downloaded at all - a screen grab will see to that.
To scupper the thieves you'd have to plaster it with copyright info on the uploaded file beyond recognition. Any subtle info can be cloned out - very easy, especially by those who are so desperate as to use others' work anyway.
Tragic and unfulfilling if you ask me - it's pathetic.
what about a default dpchallenge watermark applied to all images entered for the challenges? Sort of like the corbis watermark... It could either be applied by the site automatically or we could download an image that we could layer over our pictures in photoshop, but this would be optional. thoughts?
Then your images wouldn't look very good.
They are of such low quality print-wise that I don't think anyone is going to profit from taking a photograph from here or your website.
This comes up quite a lot and there really is nothing you can do. I have seen a lot of my work -photography and 3D on other sites. If you have your own website you can look at your logs and see where your hits are coming from.
Quite a lot of people will post photographs linking directly from your site, so by looking at the logs you can see who they are and what they are saying.
Sometimes people have posted my work and discussed it (quite a nice feeling) others have claimed it as theirs.
There are certainly several approaches to "anti-right-click" protect images, but none of these will protect against those that really wish to steal the image. If it can be displayed, it can be stolen.
I really don't care for the "default watermark" idea, in order to be useful it would need to be so obtrusive that it would inevitably detract from the images.
Our best recourse is to complain loudly to the admins of any site found to have misappropriated images on it, and to ask to have the user's account suspended or better yet terminated. In cases where the thief is running his/her own site, we can approach the ISP with our information. This last approach was very successful in dealing with a recent situation like this.
Honestly, there isn't much that can be done about this. As another poster has stated, once you post it on the Internet, it is 'free'.
Posting on the internet only makes an image freely available, not free. It's just like leaving your keys in your car- anyone can take it, but it's still a crime.
While screen captures are always an option to steal an image, not everyone thinks of that. Simply coding a transparent box over this site's images would discourage some people. Right-clicking on an image then would only get you the invisible box, not the photo.
Of course posting the image on the 'net doesn't make it free, hence my use of 'free' instead of plain ole free. The image is made freely available to view and subsequently 'steal' if one is so inclined.
No amount of extra coding, save converting all images to 100% black boxes would be able to stop such theft. Especially when there are endless conversations across all sorts of forums regarding this issue and someone remarks about the 3 or 4 ways to defeat the rather simplistic 'protection' methods discussed here.
I think we should preemptively seek out individuals who possess SMRs (Software for Mass Reproduction) and take them out before these copyright infringement attacks take place. Adobe should be held responsible for issuing software licenses to these terror...er...infringists and be held equally responsible for their actions. In light of this, I suggest we all initiate denial of service attacks on adobe.com.
I think we should preemptively seek out individuals who possess SMRs (Software for Mass Reproduction) and take them out before these copyright infringement attacks take place. Adobe should be held responsible for issuing software licenses to these terror...er...infringists and be held equally responsible for their actions. In light of this, I suggest we all initiate denial of service attacks on adobe.com.
Sorry, I'm in a weird mood.
Heh. Next you'll be telling us that you have reliable information suggesting that these so-called SMR's are in the posession of Adobe and Photoshopcontest.com, and could be used at any time...
Heh. Next you'll be telling us that you have reliable information suggesting that these so-called SMR's are in the posession of Adobe and Photoshopcontest.com, and could be used at any time...
Not only that, but I have credulous, er I mean, credible evidence that there are agents among us, on this very website, posing as original creators of photographic images. Still, these individuals are here only to plan their next use of SMR technology against us. I have a memo that fleshes all of this out, but I don't seem to be able to find it...
i would say that there is a whole different mind set between dpc and that site. dpc is about creating pictures that can be verified as original. while the whole point of the other site is to photoshop an original picture into another version of the original.
when you start with a premise like that, you are bound to have problems with people creating their own work.
It is pointless and annoying. It is not a good idea.
It does nothing to stop people stealing images, is easily circumvented and only serves to frustrate legitmate users. There are no upsides to 'right click' removal. It is a bad idea. The only vaguely slight advantage would be to issue a copyright notice, so that someone who didn't realise they were perhaps about to violate copyright law would be more informed. It is unlikely that the people doing this repeatedly, and repeatedly getting banned on the linked site here don't know it is a violation and actually care anyway.
The only way you can stop someone stealing an image is not allow them to display it on their computer, or sufficiently corrupt the image on their display to make it unusuable. This also makes it unviewable. Large 'PROOF' marks across the middle would be an example of this.
The point Gordon is making and the point I suggested earlier is that if you display it online (or anywhere in the public for that matter) it can be 'stolen'.
The only way to really stop that is as I suggested blind the populace of the world or simply refuse to display your work in a public forum, such as the Internet or a public location in the physical world.
*fixed 'bling' into 'blind' my typing sucks sometimes...*
Also plenty of swf decompilers out there... Anyways, I don't think I would be mad if someone would use my images with his name, all I could feel is pitty. Size of the images we upload here or anywhere else is not good enough so they can sell it, so if anyone posts my image with his name all I can really feel is pitty. If he would sell it that would be a different story... Just imagine what a sad person can one be to post someone else's work and say it's his own...
