roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Dear all, <p>I have found many of my pictures which I uploaded only to Photo.Net in two different web site I didn't seen before. Here the links:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://bdpsphoto.net/bbs41p4/view.php? id=interst&no=53">site nr 1</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote><p><a href="http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/lavenderhills917/880911.html">site nr 2</a></p></blockquote> <p>I already asked to the photo.net administrators (Brian) how could this happened 'cause I know all my photos are copyright protected and I belived Pboto.Net should in some way protect my copyrights.</p> <p>Is there anyone out there which have any idea on the above sites and how this could happen? Who do u suggest me to do?</p> Thnks a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikos peri Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Well, at least they gave you credit for the photos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 I forgot to mention that Brian didn't reply to me yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 That's right,but this dont' explain why it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sionnac Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 On the Flickr.com photo sharing site, they use some kind of feature (code?) which does not allow viewers to right-click and save the images. I think they can still be linked to - lots of bloggers use Flickr - but I don't know if this would appeal to photo.net users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
micheleberti Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 <p><i>"not allow viewers to right-click and save the images. I think they can still be linked to - lots of bloggers use Flickr - but I don't know if this would appeal to photo.net users."</i></p> <p>No! It doesn't work like that. Photo.Net like many other site must allow people to right click in order to facilitate the critique forum. If you do not allow people to right click and download photos how can you allow they to suggest crop, improvement and so on? </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
continuity Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 The often used javascript "security" feature is bogus anyways. It takes about 5 seconds to circumvent. If you put it on the web, someone can copy it. The courts exist to protect your copyright, so save up your money for the lawyers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 So it's useless put on every shot copyright protected......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_nitsche Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Those are blogs. People's online diaries. Most of the time they leave a signature and copyright line in (which is why I put one in every image I have). I have only run across one that claimed they took the image. I contacted the hosting company and it was removed immediately. Don't want your images used in that way? Don't upload. It's not p.nets issue to protect you. It's a decision you make when you upload to the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sionnac Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Roberto - how did you find out the sites had your images? What did you search for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 Very simple,i type "roberto carli" on Google and then i found the web-site,probably there are some more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 U said:"I contacted the hosting company and it was removed immediately." I ask you:and if those wasn't removed immediately,what should you done? Can u explain me better the "blogs" mean? Many thks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_nitsche Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Roberto, I have never had to do anything more as I said everyone else has kept the tag line in. I think of it as free advertising. Again, that is why I keep my name in every image I put on the net. Some have complained that it is a 'vanity line' or 'ego line'. I say it's good business. BLOG stands for weB LOG. It's a like an online diary. People will post what they did that day, important info about themselves and even nice images that they happened to find while cruising the net. Most of the time they are just saying "wow, look at this nice image I found on photo.net (or wherever). I check my site log weekly to see where people are coming from. So far in October I have about 22K hits to particular images from tons of blogs. I check as many of them out as I can. All so far are harmless and give me full credit for the image. If they won't remove it I guess you have a decision to make. Get a lawyer and fight for an image that is 72dpi and 700 pixels wide or just let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 It's enough!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jreades Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 <p>Roberto, you're confusing copy<i>right</i> with copy-<i>protection</i>. Your photos all have a valid copyright (which is implicit in your having published them, but which is lent legal weight by the photo.net copyright statement) and all this means is that you have every right to try to pursue to the fullest extent of the law the (presumably) Japanese people who posted your photos to a different site (although they have retained your copyright notice and so might not actually be violating your copyright).</p> <p>This is completely different from copy-protection -- I can right-click on <i>any</i> photo on this site and copy it to my desktop because these images aren't copy-protected. Try it yourself: right-click (or control+click if you're using a Mac) and select "Copy Image" and then select the desktop and hit Control+V or Command+V.</p> <p>In all probability, the reason that Brian hasn't responded is that he's very busy and this question shows a lack of understanding of what posting your photos to the web entails. You <i>can't</i> copy-protect <i>any</i> image that is shown in a normal web browser because simply to view it I have already had to download a copy of it to my computer for the browser to show me.</p> <p>In theory, photo.net could make it a lot harder for trivial rip-offs to occur by placing an invisible DIV (an HTML element) on top of the image itself, then when you try to right-click on an image you are selecting the DIV instead so there's nothing to save. However, as has been noted already, this would result in two things: 1) it would be impossible for your average user to then download a copy of someone's image for learning or quick PS adjustments and critiques, and 2) it still wouldn't stop anyone who really wanted to steal copies of your images from doing so anyway (go back to the part where I said that to display the image in my Web browser I have to have downloaded a copy of it first).</p> <p>I would suggest a few things:</p> <ul> <li>Contact the owner of the site and indicate that you are the copyright-holder and that you object to their use of your images on a site that you have not submitted content to. Be polite and you might get somewhere. Find a native Japanese-speaker to give your email the proper degree of hurt-offence and the photos will probably be removed since it looks to me like they <i>like</i> your work. <li>Place a copyright mark on your actual photos (like professional photography-for-sale sites do) in a place where it is impossible to crop without destroying the image <li>Stop posting to photo.net -- I, for one, hope that you keep posting since I enjoy looking at your landscape photos, but this is your choice and it's a legitimate one <li>Lobby for making it much harder to copy images from photo.net -- since this would make the site more difficult to use for many people <i>and</i> wouldn't really stop people from copying your images if they really wanted to, I don't see this as really being worth your time. </ul> <p>Hope this helps clarify the situation a bit... The Internet wasn't built around copy-protection standards, and although as an artist you might find this objectionable, could you imagine the impact it would have had on your life if you couldn't send functioning links to other people, download a particluarly-beautiful photo for later study, save a streaming-audio news file for later listening, or generally do anything that you like with the data that you receive. It's not ideal, but it's a heck of a lot better than what the pigopolists (i.e. media companies such as TimeWarner and Viacom) would have done to you if this had been built-in at the start. Anyway, enough of my ranting.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mottershead Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 The copyright notice you put on your photos does not prevent people from copying the photo. All it does is place people on notice that the photo is copyrighted, and that the copyright holder asserts his rights. The presence of the notice means that someone can't claim that he didn't know that the photo was copyrighted, and this gives the copyright owner additional claims if he decides to pursue a copyright infringement in court. Except for photos that you keep in your closet, any photo that is published -- whether in a book, newspaper, magazine, on the web, or any other place -- can physically be copied and reproduced in violation of copyrights. The only way to prevent this is not to publish the photos. Once the photo is published, the only thing that can stop people from copying it illegally is knowledge of copyright laws, respect for them, and/or fear of the consequences if the copyright holder pursues them legally. There are a lot of people who (a) don't know that copying photos off the web is illegal; or (b) know it is illegal, but don't think it is immoral, and therefore do it anyway because they don't think they can be pursued. A lot of the copying is done by bloggers, etc, and many of these people think they are only helping the photographer exhibit his/her work -- which they suppose is what the photographer was interested in when they uploaded the photo to a site like photo.net. This is why you will see them giving credit to the original photographer. It does not occur to them they should ask for permission or that they are doing anything wrong. I am not sanctioning this behaviour, but it is not uncommon. In general, photo.net does not have the resources to pursue indviduals who violate the copyright on photographs that are uploaded to the web site. We would, and have successfully, pursued people who have illegally copied material from photo.net in violation of our Terms of Use and our members' copyrights in significant amounts and for commercial uses. But we don't have time, unfortunately, to go after naive kids in South Korea (etc) who use a photo or two published on photo.net in their blogs or personal sites. The main person who must protect your copyrights is you. You could do this, for example, by sending a letter or email to the people who have illegally copied your photos, asking them to take the photos down. If the web site is in the United States, you can use the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to demand that their ISP takes down the photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 My question is why did you fail to watermark your images with "?Roberto Carli" before posting them here or anywhere else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 U are right,so starting from now will do it,thks for ur time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberto_carli Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 Many thks for ur explanations,much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo2 Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 I've also have one photo on the same site (http://blog.empas.com/wopark/3873364) (but i don't understand a lot of what about the page is talking about) eheh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now