Copyright Thieves Beware

[Reepo]

If you run a website (whether for profit or not) and feature images you don't own the copyright on, your world just got crapper.

Take a look at what a US judge just did:

http://www.avnonline.com/issues/200204/ ... lead.shtml

And then think again the next time you decide to pinch someones work!

[Buttsie]

If you don't want pictures to be used elsewhere illegally
get rid of the Right click and save

seems simple to me

Without this feature which is quite prevalent in the Us due to legislation i believe people will download and then upload to places like Yahoo,Msn,Lycos etc.

cheers
b...Oz

[golostruda]

But would this precedent apply if, like anyone sensible, your page links to the picture from its original location (ie the copyright owner's website is hosting it, not yours)... surely not?

[Phil McC]

Software allows right click funtions you save the whole page and then cut out the jpg... the best soloution "Fuckin ask the guy who took the picture". When I started my web-site I bought stuff from everyone I could, I did not have much money but I payed for the pictures.. I even bought from John Mason ask him. If I can buy the stuff to start a web site why can everyone else. If you don't have any money don't build a site,,, seems easy. I can understand why John get pissed off when he gets ripped off he must spend more time beating the fly's off than he does taking pictures which he loves.
Me, everyone seems to ask me for the right to use, sometimes I say yes sometimes no depends on who and the project. I have thousands of new images not even up on the web yet but they will be soon anyone nick's them to wank over fine by me,,Build a web-site with them and I will close them down one way or the other. There is no such a thing as public domain..

Phil McC

[Oid]

Er, of course it would. You can't just hotlink into images on another persons server as the impression to the surfer would still be that the images were 'on your site', Loads of sites got into trouble for this sort of thing when frames first came out as they would link to other sites while retaining some of their frameset, thus implying that the content was part of their site.
As many of you here will know, copyright on the internet is an issue I've been efected by quite alot. I also think that alot of the problem comes from new webmasters being very naive. They see a web site with loads of pics they want to nick for there site and they also see a statment saying ' All pics are thought to be public domain'. So then they make a site with the same statement and the same nicked pics. This goes on and on. This situation is not helped by the attitude of some of the pay site owners, some of who encourage free site owners to nick pics to put along their free content as the site will get more traffic. This happened to me the other day when i was talking to a guy who runs the offical site for proberly the biggest porn star in the world.
Phil's right about the right click thingy not really helping stop someone who knows what their doing. And he also touched on a more worrying topic: That if this continues then people like Phil, John Mason etc... will have to be spending so much time shutting down sites with their shit on that they will not be able ( and proberly unwilling) to make new stuff.

I also think that their are alot of webmasters out there who should be used by the paysites (content owners) and not just shut down.
Anyway, Oid
www.oidsworld.com

[Phil McC]

Cool Oid, send me one down I am interviewing for someone right now,,,, I have plans for a new great site based on Penhouse UK etc so there is plenty work.
As for niave webmasters well when I burst into a post office looking for the till the last thing I could be called was naive. If you are nicking anything your are a crim not a naive webmaster,,, I was but I am not now so thats that.

Phil McC

[Buttsie]

The right click and save as i see is a minor point its what you do with the pics. if they can stop right click & save on pics why not the page?

Yahoo has taken the sit on the fence approach by withdrawing the index for adult sites not that they care about copyright pics but they would prefer if no one could find these clubs/groups easily especially those that own the pics.

If there policy was to close down all adult clubs that have copyright pics there probably wouldn't be any Yahoo adult clubs.

cheers
b...Oz

[zasuna]

are we talking about paysites or free sites,its been said many times people who charge for copyrighted pics are well in the wrong,but free sites who knows?

every photo on the internet is owned by somebody but who asks for permission before they download.we can get albums from napster etc, films (last night i watched blade2) and porn pics why pay ?25 for a sex vid when i can download as much as i want on broadband for ?35 a month.loads of brit stuff out there ben,rocco,fuck truck,strand and more choice than your choice.

Jim you cannot believe that it is the same as sticking up the local post office ,it is not a civil crime,and does it make people who use the sites recievers of stolen property i think not.

behold the turtle,he only makes progress when he sticks his head out.

zasuna

[Reepo]

oooh, debate! Fact is, a lot of blokes start up sites and run them through AVS things like Adult Check, which charge money to access the sites. That's copyright theft, pure and simple. If you're earning money on the back of someone elses photographs, you should watch your back.

I know a lot of the bigger photogs use watermarks and then send crawler programs out on the web and contact *everyone* who has their images without permission

Fan clubs and things like Yahoo arentr such a big deal because they're not charging.

But theft is theft. Just like all those postings about swapping copies of videos that we used to see here on BGAFD!

[Reepo]

the other thing new webmasters and free site people should think about is the release form issue.

if you've swiped someones pictures then you don't have the release paperwork either. And that can get you into hot water too!