| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/06/2007 11:47:10 AM · #26 |
you got a 350rebel XT. i would have thought you'd make a bigger jump up than that ?
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 11:49:09 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by soup:
server load at rollover could be avoided if two copies of the challenge entry uploads are created upon upload. after the rollover period the unwatermarked file could be deleted from the system. this would let the process of applying the water be spread out over the course of the week rather than all at once at rollover time... |
Of course people who are determined to steal images fromDPC can just steal the nwatermarked ones during voting! |
|
|
|
02/06/2007 11:51:45 AM · #28 |
I put one on a few of my images so far. You can see an example here.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:03:12 PM · #29 |
I think I might go steal Cindi's label... I like hers better :-)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:05:38 PM · #30 |
Can I copy your copyright notice? :)
I agree that something extra needs to be done. I have no idea what. I have just spent most of my morning convincing a local buisness that the two images of mine that they scanned from a local ad cannot be used on their "free" Durango screen saver. I don't mind so much if someone links to one of mine (actually that is kind of a compliment) but to upload it onto a site without any permission at all is insane.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:06:38 PM · #31 |
This copyright notice is copyright protected.....
Hehehee just kidding. Anyone may use mine, I don't mind. :)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:26:36 PM · #32 |
well yeah - but they can steal them for eternity as it stands now. the odds are pretty slim that folks a culling the running challenges. more likely they are culling the archives ( and the winners of the challenges ).
you're quite the pessimist ;}
Originally posted by rainmotorsports:
Of course people who are determined to steal images fromDPC can just steal the nwatermarked ones during voting! |
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:27:34 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Unfortunately its WAY on the bottom of the page and I assure you someone determined to steal a few images isn't going to browse around to see if there is a copyright notice. |
Someone determined to steal a few images isn't going to care one way or another, where you tell them not to.
The only way that works is to obscure the image to the point that the content can't be seen. At which point, you might as well not upload it. If you want to ruin all the images on the site with some watermark after the challenge, you might as well delete them instead.
There isn't a reliable way to stop someone taking an image if they want it, while at the same time letting people view it properly.
Can't be done.
Most people know about copyright and don't care anyway. They think it is 'fair use' to use it however they like if they aren't selling it - after all, what's the 'harm' and so on.
if you don't want people to see/ use your images, don't post them. It's that simple.
Message edited by author 2007-02-06 12:28:19.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:31:40 PM · #34 |
no way to prevent someone from using an image. there are ways to make it more of a pain in the ass for the 'casual' stealer. a watermark. most aren't going to go to the effort of PS'ing out a water mark. i would think these types of folks are pretty lazy - or they'd be out making better images themselves...
Originally posted by Gordon:
Someone determined to steal a few images isn't going to care one way or another, where you tell them not to.
The only way that works is to obscure the image to the point that the content can't be seen. At which point, you might as well not upload it. If you want to ruin all the images on the site with some watermark after the challenge, you might as well delete them instead.
There isn't a reliable way to stop someone taking an image if they want it, while at the same time letting people view it properly.
Can't be done.
Most people know about copyright and don't care anyway. They think it is 'fair use' to use it however they like if they aren't selling it - after all, what's the 'harm' and so on.
if you don't want people to see/ use your images, don't post them. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:32:42 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Most people know about copyright and don't care anyway. They think it is 'fair use' to use it however they like if they aren't selling it - after all, what's the 'harm' and so on. |
Actually, from a few exchanges Cindi and I had with others on break.com... I think a lot of people don't know that images on the net aren't public domain.
Message edited by author 2007-02-06 12:35:48.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:35:19 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by soup:
i would think these types of folks are pretty lazy - or they'd be out making better images themselves...
|
Sooo, true :-)
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:41:39 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by soup:
no way to prevent someone from using an image. there are ways to make it more of a pain in the ass for the 'casual' stealer. a watermark. most aren't going to go to the effort of PS'ing out a water mark. i would think these types of folks are pretty lazy - or they'd be out making better images themselves.. |
But the point is, those watermarks make the images a pain in the ass for the casual or not so casual viewer as well. Why make everyone who uses the site suffer for the sake of a few pinched images ? When the solution is worse than the problem, you have to look for a better solution, or accept the problem, not screw it up for everyone equally.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:42:40 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Most people know about copyright and don't care anyway. They think it is 'fair use' to use it however they like if they aren't selling it - after all, what's the 'harm' and so on. |
Actually, from a few exchanges Cindi and I had with others on break.com... I think a lot of people don't know that images on the net aren't public domain. |
They probably don't know that they are supposed to pay to listen to music or watch movies either, when they get caught. In other words, it sounds like they are blowing smoke. 'Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know, honest! I won't do it again, really. Unless I really like the image and it'll suit my myspace page'
Sorry - but this comes up every 6 months or so. The solutions are always either completely ineffectual, or more detrimental to the normal viewers than those who might steal the images. Nothing has changed in the last 6 months. If you can see it, it can be trivially stolen. If you can't see it, you ruin the experience for everyone else.
Message edited by author 2007-02-06 12:45:24.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:45:14 PM · #39 |
I know the theives will still be there - but my point was that it doesn't take much effort at all to be a little proactive.
That took a whole 10 minutes to create and another 5 to upload to my most viewed images.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:45:15 PM · #40 |
Both Leroy's and Cindy's copyright graphics are so screaming, that they distract my attention from the picture to the graphics almost immediately.
I definitely would not want watermarks inside of my images. But I would not mind unobtrusive copyright fine print directly under the pictures.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:47:06 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by idnic:
I know the theives will still be there - but my point was that it doesn't take much effort at all to be a little proactive.
That took a whole 10 minutes to create and another 5 to upload to my most viewed images. |
Works really well for the recording industry. Something similar is on every CD you've bought or song you've downloaded. It takes you 15 minutes to do it and 1 second to blow off as yet another copyright message.
People really don't care, or they wouldn't do things that they know is copyright infringement. Unless of course you have the money for the legal team to chase down the infringer's. You do have that legal team, right ? Otherwise it's just BS and easily ignored.
Message edited by author 2007-02-06 12:49:08.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:47:17 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by agenkin:
Both Leroy's and Cindy's copyright graphics are so screaming, that they distract my attention from the picture to the graphics almost immediately. |
That is PRECISELY the point.... after voting, I would prefer for people to see the copyright notice FIRST, then enjoy the image.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:48:14 PM · #43 |
I now embed my name in the file of each image I place on the Internet. Even paid shoots I enter "© Michael P. Randazzo 2007" right after I download them from my camera in the "copyright notice" with Photo shop.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:51:03 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by soup:
no way to prevent someone from using an image. there are ways to make it more of a pain in the ass for the 'casual' stealer. a watermark. most aren't going to go to the effort of PS'ing out a water mark. i would think these types of folks are pretty lazy - or they'd be out making better images themselves.. |
But the point is, those watermarks make the images a pain in the ass for the casual or not so casual viewer as well. Why make everyone who uses the site suffer for the sake of a few pinched images ? When the solution is worse than the problem, you have to look for a better solution, or accept the problem, not screw it up for everyone equally. |
The solution is to make the transparent .gif idea into a translucent watermark that magically disappears when you pay for a membership. Membership has its perks, ya know, and this could easily be one of them.
Another solution is to give users the choice whether or not their images will be watermarked, via a checkbox under Preferences.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:51:12 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by idnic:
I know the theives will still be there - but my point was that it doesn't take much effort at all to be a little proactive.
That took a whole 10 minutes to create and another 5 to upload to my most viewed images. |
Bottom line is if you do not register your images with the Copyright office of the United States you can not collect anything as far as financial. You can prosecute in civil court to stop the use of the image. You can not collect any damages though.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:52:02 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by MPRPRO:
Bottom line is if you do not register your images with the Copyright office of the United States you can not collect anything as far as financial. You can prosecute in civil court to stop the use of the image. You can not collect any damages though. |
Well aware of that fact. I've been registering my images in groups by year --- still have lots to do though.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 12:57:47 PM · #47 |
Or you can just look at it as the incidental costs of all this free advertising and exposure your images get. If you didn't have them on line, maybe a handful of people would have seen your images. Yet here, you have an audience of thousands. For free.
It is a pretty good deal when you consider it in those terms. If an image is valuable enough that you expect to make money from it, then small thumbnails aren't going to loose you much money if they are mis-appropriated - they might just create more demand (free advertising)
Credit and attribution is a flimsy thing at best anyway. If some teenager in Idaho wants to claim to have taken my paintbrush shot, then what damage does it do to me ? Or if they want to decorate a personal site with an image, how have I lost out ?
Maybe you loose a 20c istock fee. More valuable images that might be sold for web usage, it doesn't make sense to enter into challenges anyway - but perhaps thats the issue. If they are valuable, don't put them out there for free. If they aren't valuable, don't sweat it.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 01:02:45 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by MPRPRO:
Bottom line is if you do not register your images with the Copyright office of the United States you can not collect anything as far as financial. You can prosecute in civil court to stop the use of the image. You can not collect any damages though. |
Note quite -- without (timely) registration you are limited to collecting actual damages, not attorney/court costs and "prospective" or punitive damages. |
|
|
|
02/06/2007 01:04:22 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
[ Unless of course you have the money for the legal team to chase down the infringer's. You do have that legal team, right ? Otherwise it's just BS and easily ignored. |
If you're willing to do some of the legwork and track down who has your image posted on their site, any good IP attorney will gladly take the case, knowing that the infringer, not the creator will be nailed for all legal fees. In most blatant cases, the infringer will be more than happy to settle for enough money to make both the creator and their attorney happy.
I've read accounts where someone simply posted a picture without permission on their website and the creator collected several thousand dollars. People who infringe are often under the mistaken impression that simply removing the image after being notified that they are infringing is enough to avoid litigation. It isn't.
|
|
|
|
02/06/2007 01:05:02 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by idnic:
That is PRECISELY the point.... after voting, I would prefer for people to see the copyright notice FIRST, then enjoy the image. |
I understand the intention. I was saying that enjoying the image becomes problematic when some bright banner screams at you about copyright.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/28/2025 05:19:55 PM EDT.
