Protecting web site images

[Bob]

Do you worry about it?

I had to laugh just now..
Out of habit, I often right click images to see how large (file size) they are - just visited a pipe band site, was curious if the reason for the slow load of the web page was because of their images file size.. so I right clicked.. got a two paragraph warning :rolleyes: 'function disabled, bla bla blah...' you know, but :D

So, a quick 'File - Save' gets me everything, and then looked on my hard drive.. now I have every image :D BTW - the images were reasonable in size, my question answered, and I deleted it all ..but really funny to me how I ended up instantly copying every photo, just to get a simple answer .. the 'code' to warn about copyright etc.. worse than a waste of time

OK.. so that was the reason for this.. But I'm wondering..
Considering that if we make a web site easy to view, there is truly nothing we can really do to 'protect' our images from a person that really wants them.. What do you do?
And - how do you feel about this?

Me - it bugs me a bit.. But I post on web sites at a size that is good for the web, but not for large prints (nothing diabolical here, just a fact) And as I do this just for fun, so I really appreciate the people that ask permission (I always give it BTW).. But, I do sell a fair number of photos, and everyone knows this I think.. So the people that ask me to send them a copy, in really high res, copyright type removed, so they can print it.. gee.. they are .. :bleh:

[Tammy]

I don't do anything and I don't really worry about it. The only website I do that has lots and lots of photos is the Bagpipe Summer School (http://www.bagpipesummerschool.com) site. The first day of school I get up in front of everyone and make sure everyone is aware of who I am, and why I'm taking their photo, and if anyone has a problem being in a photo to let me know or step out when they see me shooting pictures. Since we get everyone's consent, I don't worry about photos out there coming back to bite me. (Same goes for our band site.) On the last day of school, at graduation, I get up and thank everyone for their cooperation and tell everyone they are welcome to download any photos for their own personal use.

Like you said, there are tricks to getting around roadblocks, so why bother? :shrug:

[Patrick Dean]

I don't worry about, and it really is a pointless exercise, IMHO. Images on the web are public domain by nature, and even if they are "protected" in some way to prevent the right click - save as, they are already in one of your temp directories anyway.

Our band members are all aware that any time a pic is taken, chances are they are going to be displayed on our web-site. Haven't had any objections yet, except for those who say "That really isn't a good one of me. Can you change it?" My reply, "Err, nope." :D

[CalumII]

How can you? At the end of the day, you have to display the picture on the screen somehow, and once you've done that, screenshots, here we come. Or memory space hacking. Or whatever.

I wish someone would explain the difference to me between looking at a picture on the web three times a day, and saving a copy of it so that you don't have to make Bob's server suffer even more. Likewise the difference between letting someone download a picture to view in a web browser, but not letting them print out a copy to stick on their wall. Granted it's bit cheeky to then request a hi-res version, but as you've already noted, you're quite happy for people to use them with your permission. I notice in passing that the actual PPOD page has nothing to say on this beyond the boilerplate copyright notice.

Cheers,
Calum

[Marc]

I'm going with Patrick on this one. If you wont you pics used by someone, don't publish them on the net. Everything displayed by your browser is available by you. There exists nothing to protect it. Or create a pw protected section of your site only for restricted access.
I don't like this sites with this simple feature activated. A little copyright note beneath the pic/text/media/whatever has the same effect (at least for me).
Again, to protect your pics don't publish them on the net. Period.

[Ian Lawther]

I don't know if this is relevent to this disussion but a few months back I looked up the website for the race course where the Fair Hill Highland Games take place. I was just after the correct address to put in to Mapquest.

I tried to cut and paste the address from the page to Mapquest and a pop up appeared telling me "Sorry -items on this page are not public domain". It also comes up when you right click anything on the page. They obviously have something built into the page to do this, and whether someone savvy can get round it easily I don't know. Have a look at http://www.fairhillraces.org/

Having a look at the page source I think the code that covers the warning pop up box is just below the header information. I tried to paste it in here but the forum software didn't like me putting code into a post....so you;ll have to look it up yourselves if you are that interested.

Ian

[Thomas Grotrian]

Originally posted by Ian Lawther:


I tried to cut and paste the address from the page to Mapquest and a pop up appeared telling me "Sorry -items on this page are not public domain". It also comes up when you right click anything on the page. They obviously have something built into the page to do this, and whether someone savvy can get round it easily I don't know. Have a look at http://www.fairhillraces.org/

Ian I just tried it and if you highlight the address and then press 'ctrl C' you can copy it, but it won't let you right click.

On the question of images. We do not do anything to protect the pictures on our site. Generally if anyone wants to use them it is because they have taken part in or are talking about one of our events - in which case it does us a lot more good than harm - so we are more than happy for others to copy or link to them. Anyone that wants to reprint one of the images (hi-res - either for themselves or in a publication) we put in touch with the photographer who took them in the first place, he then makes a few extra bob (or lets them have them for nothing but gets a credit) and we still get the publicity.

[RogerW]

We don't try to put copy protection
on our website. I think that just
encourages some people to try and
"hack it".

We do think of all of our images
as copyrighted. I've had one
occurance where a photo from our
site was being used (via deep linking)
on a kid's parody site.

I didn't appreciate his humor and
broke the link. He's luck I didn't
decide to replace that image with
something else.

Regards,
Roger

[Brendan Dunne]

Had no problem with cut & paste by :
1) highlight the address
2) <CNTRL> <C>
3) <CNTRL> <V>

So all their coding efforts ($$) were for naught as a dummy like me can use the basics and get past this.

(edit by me: ooops, i see thomas already covered this)


Originally posted by Ian Lawther:
I don't know if this is relevent to this disussion but a few months back I looked up the website for the race course where the Fair Hill Highland Games take place. I was just after the correct address to put in to Mapquest.

I tried to cut and paste the address from the page to Mapquest and a pop up appeared telling me "Sorry -items on this page are not public domain". It also comes up when you right click anything on the page. They obviously have something built into the page to do this, and whether someone savvy can get round it easily I don't know. Have a look at http://www.fairhillraces.org/

Having a look at the page source I think the code that covers the warning pop up box is just below the header information. I tried to paste it in here but the forum software didn't like me putting code into a post....so you;ll have to look it up yourselves if you are that interested.

Ian

[Brendan Dunne]

Why is it that someone can take pictures, put them on a web site, protect them, and claim ownership when the pictures were taken at a public event without the consent of the subjects?

Thanks for any enlightenment.

[Pete Walen]

Originally posted by Leprechaun:
Why is it that someone can take pictures, put them on a web site, protect them, and claim ownership when the pictures were taken at a public event without the consent of the subjects?

Thanks for any enlightenment. Because the photographer owns the image. Other people may take a similar photograph, but that unique image - taken at that precise angle, date, time, lighting - belongs to the photographer.

When you sit for a formal portrait, the photographer also owns the image. In some circumstances you can negotiate to buy the rights (and the image) from the photographer. Usually if you don't do this up front, you won't be able to do it later.

The same applies to the images made by the papparazzi of famous folks. The fact that the persons are in a public place engaging in public activity waives whatever personal privacy rights they may have. Using long lenses to shoot images of them through the window of their home is another matter. Once you're in public - you're fair game.

[Brendan Dunne]

Thanks Pete. I kinda understand. So why doesn't this same argument hold true when someone posts their pictures on a public forum?
Once they are posted on a public site (not a pay-to-access site) - shouldn't they be fair game? I mean the 'artist' made a choice to release the picture in public domain. I think he/she forfeits all at this point.
:shrug:

Originally posted by PeteBoom:
Once you're in public - you're fair game.

[Pete Walen]

Good question, Leprechaun. The thing is, putting an image on a site that can be accessed by the public does not "release the picture in public domain". The ideas of "public domain" and "public forum" or "general access" are complementary but they are not the same.

The photographer still retains the rights to the image.

A book on the shelf of a lending library is still protected even though it is readily available to the public without being purchased. One could check the book out and photocopy every page. It would not be legal, but you could use technology to do so.

As far as the pull quote from my previous post. The image is protected by copyright, not the subject. That is, if I see you at a games and I take your picture. I own the rights to that image. If I post it on the web, I still own the rights to the picture.

There is a legal grey area that is being bashed/thrashed over, however, the way things are falling out is this: Publishing on the web is no different than publishing in a book or periodical/magazine. The ease of replication does not have an impact on the legality of replication.

OK - off the soapbox.

[Brendan Dunne]

No soapbox - that's good information.

Hey man - I appreciate your time. The information you have given is good and it gives me something to ponder. I still have a mental block on this and I'll take your information, search some more, and come to some understanding.

Thanks again. :wave:

Originally posted by PeteBoom:
OK - off the soapbox.

[Brendan Dunne]

Update (I think it is important)

Ruben Studdard has sued 205 Flava for using his picture on their websites. He contends that they have profitted from his image which they used without his permission.

Interesting enough, we're back to who owns the image and how they use it.
If he wins his case, it should prove interesting.