Comments on: Copy, Right?

By: Craig

Craig — Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:24:21 +0000

I think a creative commons license is a perfect solution for you. you could allow people to use for personal use(high school report), but disallow commercial use. so some guy uses your apple & blade image for a header on his blog, some textbook guy sees this on the blog and thinks hmmm..this photographer would be great for our next earth science text book. he contacts you because the guy using your image on his blog has given you fair credit as stated in your creative commons deed. thats win win. screw the whole i am going to sue you thing, who wants to do that? yuk. let me know what you think.

with regards
craig

By: Shadow_Xj5

Shadow_Xj5 — Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:32:28 +0000

To comment on google images, google reads the robot.txt file at the root of the site (if it can find one) and looks for one in each subdirectory it goes into, in this file you can prevent it from reading images, addtionaly you can set your host up to disable hotlinking, so the only way people would beable to get the images is by visiting the site.

By: Denyerec

Denyerec — Sun, 28 Mar 2004 11:18:24 +0000

Thing is, if I spend 12 hours a day producing photographic content that everyone uses for free, I starve to death and there’s no more free content… If people use it, and say they’re using it, I’m less likely to be mad about it, but at the end of the day I need to keep a roof over my head. I guess it boils down to “If you wanna use them, ask first and we’ll work something out.” I’m not going to charge a highschool kid if he wants to use something in his report, but if someone’s putting on a gallery show in their name…hoooya.

By: Barny

Barny — Sun, 28 Mar 2004 09:14:56 +0000

Sounds like a terrible idea

Content wants to be free, copyright is a Bad Thing(tm). Much better is licensing everything under something nice like the GNU FDL (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html) or when of those trendy Creative Commons licenses (creativecommons.org) and if you’re paranoid, using digital watermarking to make sure no-one is breaking the license. 😉

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 25 Mar 2004 08:04:31 +0000

I think it sounds great, nothing scares (normal) people more than a nice big warning. Put the fear up the image-stealing gypo’s!

I’m sorry to say it Denyerec, but if other web companies are like the two i’ve experienced, then your images are not safe. Get digimarking asap, or your images will be pilfered courtesy of google! I’m all for paying photographers to do what they do as a service for me, but unfortunately if a boss thinks he can get it for free, then you have no option.

I notice that photoshop inserts XML into the graphic (just try saving a jpg in photoshop, then loading it into editplus). I wonder if you could put a simple marking on that in the mean time. I mean sure it’s easy to remove, but at the same time, how many people think to check there? Even better, get GPG and make yourself a key, then encrypt your details into the image (as above). Most people will think its ‘just junk’ after a quick check, but you’ll be able to mark things.

How hard could it be to write a script to ‘mark’ a file, and ‘check’ a file?

Feel free to delete this comment if you plan to take it onboard!

By: Zoomer

Zoomer — Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:05:50 +0000

all sounds a bit cheeky to me but if it makes money 😀