My images stolen and abused!!!!

Peter Zack · 04-01-2008, 06:11 AM

Nothing. It was a religious reference

Sorry Mr. Sullivan, no offense meant.

simons-photography · 04-01-2008, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by blwnhr

I'm staying out of this discussion, ony to say that that forum is sooooo hard to read!

hard ? I find it quite impossible and only go there to read reviews

sorry to hear your images were abused chris I generally never post images anywhere if I want to show a picture to a forum I link to its page on my own site that has copyright warning on all pages, I also fill out all the exif data relative to copyrights so at least some people can find out where they really came from

shutterpuppy · 04-01-2008, 07:00 AM

My biggest nightmare when I switched from 35mm to digital photography was saying to myself "What if I see one of my images on a forum like this and then seeing it later on another site where they award prizes for them and somebody else getting the award/credit for them. I have heard of watermark software that protects your images but don't know if it does any good, at least with film, you had proof that you made the shot.(negatives)

Barry

simons-photography · 04-01-2008, 07:07 AM

well people argue that the RAW file is proof of legal rights and I would think that if you can produce a 10 Mp version of a picture on the web then it must be yours

PeterAM · 04-01-2008, 09:22 AM

Codiac2600/Chris:

One of my responsibilities during my career in publishing was the licensing of all international rights (outside US) for one of the largest publishers in the world. I could probably write a book about some of things that I had to deal with, including ripoffs that were done by foreign governments. Using pictures that are posted on the web appears to be easy enough to do, that it probably should be expected that it will ultimately happen.
The only thing that I can add to this discussion, is if the site is owned by a public company (I believe that DPReview is now part of Amazon) you can complain to them. Public companies, for the most part (in the US anyway) don't want adverse publicity. I would send a letter to the President of Canon, if only to vent a bit.
Along with some of the other members that have said it, I'd like to thank you for your educational and helpful postings on this forum.

raz-0 · 04-01-2008, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by codiac2600

The concept is made for educators and librarians and shouldn't be used to grab peoples work online, manipulate the and then use them out of context. If he had shown my work as an original and cited me as the source then there wouldn't be any problem under fair use but again he didn't follow the proper channels to do what he did.

As has been pointed out already, this is a completley wrong interpretation of fair use. That being said, it would be fair use to use an image to critique the image, or possibly the techniques used to create it. Using them for what ammounts to a product comparison just counts as being lazy and stealing your work.

Originally posted by maxamillion

Codiac2600.

Try this.

Dynamic Drive DHTML Scripts- Disable right mouse click script

Ok.. on opera, tools->advanced->java script options-> deselect allow script to receive right clicks. Done. Does not work.

You have to send me the image, my client renders it. That means I have the image.

I could also just clear my cache, load the page, and then browse all the image files in my cache.

With flash there's screen capture.

In the end, if you send me the bits to display on a screen (within a framebuffer), I can get those bits back out. It's just a question of how hard I have to work to do it. Once someone does the hard work once, it's fairly trivial to automate most things.

**NaClH2O** · 04-01-2008, 03:28 PM

Chris, I'm sorry you had to go thru this. I'm glad that the offending thread has been deleted from DPR and Canon Europe. It sucks when nasty stuff like this happens to you. However having been there once or twice I'm not surprised at the low level evinced by that forum.

NaCl(a gathering of numsquatzes for sure, that place)H2O

JCSullivan · 04-02-2008, 05:50 AM

Comments to Chris made furthe up.

Please, would someone tell somebody to STEAL or RIP-OFF some of my work with one condition; tell me where they are so I can brag about it to family and friends.

rormeister · 04-02-2008, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by JCSullivan

Please, would someone tell somebody to STEAL or RIP-OFF some of my work with one condition; tell me where they are so I can brag about it to family and friends.

Agreed, I envy Chris for even having anything worth stealing

It'll be a long time before I'm in his league.

codiac2600 · 04-03-2008, 12:28 PM

Thank you everyone for the support and everything seems to be in order now. It was a tough time and it really sucked having to go through it, but I'm going to change a few things even though it's difficult to do personally.

You can read about it and what I've done on my web blog at Photography 2.0 - Uconventional - Unrestriced - Unreal- powered by SmugMug just click on NEWS in the navbar.

moxfyre · 04-03-2008, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by codiac2600

Thank you everyone for the support and everything seems to be in order now. It was a tough time and it really sucked having to go through it, but I'm going to change a few things even though it's difficult to do personally.

You can read about it and what I've done on my web blog at Photography 2.0 - Uconventional - Unrestriced - Unreal- powered by SmugMug just click on NEWS in the navbar.

Dude, I hate to tell ya... but your images aren't "protected" in any way. It takes me 5 seconds to disable JavaScript (Tools | Options | Content in Firefox), and then I can copy the images same as always.

Using Flash would be even more annoying, and equally ineffective...

Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story.

codiac2600 · 04-03-2008, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by moxfyre

Dude, I hate to tell ya... but your images aren't "protected" in any way. It takes me 5 seconds to disable JavaScript (Tools | Options | Content in Firefox), and then I can copy the images same as always.

Using Flash would be even more annoying, and equally ineffective...

Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story.

There is more, all my new images that upload will have an ugly copyright right through the center of the image.

Not too mention 90% of people do not know how to disable the right-click feature, so it's ok that you can.

moxfyre · 04-03-2008, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by codiac2600

There is more, all my new images that upload will have an ugly copyright right through the center of the image.

Ah, gotcha. Well, putting a watermark/copyright splotch is certainly more effective in preventing misuse, I think!

Originally posted by codiac2600

Not too mention 90% of people do not know how to disable the right-click feature, so it's ok that you can.

People who are likely to steal your images and actually use them for commercial purposes, where you'd have a financial interest in stopping them, are likely to know how to do this.

If it gives you peace of mind, keep it, but...

Geekybiker · 04-03-2008, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by moxfyre

Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story.

Yup. Hit printscreen and paste into photoshop then crop. Defeats any protection.

codiac2600 · 04-03-2008, 01:39 PM

Here is the garbage I had to attach to my photos... ugh is it ugly

04-01-2008, 07:00 AM	#63
shutterpuppy Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 319	My biggest nightmare when I switched from 35mm to digital photography was saying to myself "What if I see one of my images on a forum like this and then seeing it later on another site where they award prizes for them and somebody else getting the award/credit for them. I have heard of watermark software that protects your images but don't know if it does any good, at least with film, you had proof that you made the shot.(negatives) Barry Last edited by shutterpuppy; 04-01-2008 at 09:29 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Stolen Gear!	akope	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	10-11-2011 12:50 AM
Portfolio on facebook = stolen images?	dugrant153	Photographic Industry and Professionals	14	04-30-2010 08:49 PM
Stolen model ....	-=JoN=-	Post Your Photos!	8	04-12-2009 05:58 PM
stolen cameras?	Torphoto	Photographic Technique	12	01-08-2009 04:55 PM
All my cameras were stolen	PDL	General Talk	39	01-04-2009 11:43 PM

04-01-2008, 06:11 AM	#61
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Nothing. It was a religious reference Sorry Mr. Sullivan, no offense meant.

04-01-2008, 06:46 AM	#62
simons-photography Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northamptonshire - England Photos: Gallery Posts: 496	Originally posted by blwnhr I'm staying out of this discussion, ony to say that that forum is sooooo hard to read! hard ? I find it quite impossible and only go there to read reviews sorry to hear your images were abused chris I generally never post images anywhere if I want to show a picture to a forum I link to its page on my own site that has copyright warning on all pages, I also fill out all the exif data relative to copyrights so at least some people can find out where they really came from

04-01-2008, 07:07 AM	#64
simons-photography Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northamptonshire - England Photos: Gallery Posts: 496	well people argue that the RAW file is proof of legal rights and I would think that if you can produce a 10 Mp version of a picture on the web then it must be yours

04-01-2008, 09:22 AM	#65
PeterAM Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Litchfield, CT Posts: 539	Codiac2600/Chris: One of my responsibilities during my career in publishing was the licensing of all international rights (outside US) for one of the largest publishers in the world. I could probably write a book about some of things that I had to deal with, including ripoffs that were done by foreign governments. Using pictures that are posted on the web appears to be easy enough to do, that it probably should be expected that it will ultimately happen. The only thing that I can add to this discussion, is if the site is owned by a public company (I believe that DPReview is now part of Amazon) you can complain to them. Public companies, for the most part (in the US anyway) don't want adverse publicity. I would send a letter to the President of Canon, if only to vent a bit. Along with some of the other members that have said it, I'd like to thank you for your educational and helpful postings on this forum.

04-01-2008, 02:34 PM	#66
raz-0 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Central NJ Posts: 470	Originally posted by codiac2600 The concept is made for educators and librarians and shouldn't be used to grab peoples work online, manipulate the and then use them out of context. If he had shown my work as an original and cited me as the source then there wouldn't be any problem under fair use but again he didn't follow the proper channels to do what he did. As has been pointed out already, this is a completley wrong interpretation of fair use. That being said, it would be fair use to use an image to critique the image, or possibly the techniques used to create it. Using them for what ammounts to a product comparison just counts as being lazy and stealing your work. Originally posted by maxamillion Codiac2600. Try this. Dynamic Drive DHTML Scripts- Disable right mouse click script Ok.. on opera, tools->advanced->java script options-> deselect allow script to receive right clicks. Done. Does not work. You have to send me the image, my client renders it. That means I have the image. I could also just clear my cache, load the page, and then browse all the image files in my cache. With flash there's screen capture. In the end, if you send me the bits to display on a screen (within a framebuffer), I can get those bits back out. It's just a question of how hard I have to work to do it. Once someone does the hard work once, it's fairly trivial to automate most things.

04-01-2008, 03:28 PM	#67
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	Chris, I'm sorry you had to go thru this. I'm glad that the offending thread has been deleted from DPR and Canon Europe. It sucks when nasty stuff like this happens to you. However having been there once or twice I'm not surprised at the low level evinced by that forum. NaCl(a gathering of numsquatzes for sure, that place)H2O

04-02-2008, 05:50 AM	#68
JCSullivan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Windsor, Canada Posts: 3,056	Comments to Chris made furthe up. Please, would someone tell somebody to STEAL or RIP-OFF some of my work with one condition; tell me where they are so I can brag about it to family and friends.

04-02-2008, 07:34 AM	#69
rormeister Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 626	Originally posted by JCSullivan Please, would someone tell somebody to STEAL or RIP-OFF some of my work with one condition; tell me where they are so I can brag about it to family and friends. Agreed, I envy Chris for even having anything worth stealing It'll be a long time before I'm in his league.

04-03-2008, 12:28 PM	#70
codiac2600 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Rockford, Illinois Posts: 2,027 Original Poster	Thank you everyone for the support and everything seems to be in order now. It was a tough time and it really sucked having to go through it, but I'm going to change a few things even though it's difficult to do personally. You can read about it and what I've done on my web blog at Photography 2.0 - Uconventional - Unrestriced - Unreal- powered by SmugMug just click on NEWS in the navbar.

04-03-2008, 12:33 PM	#71
moxfyre Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 86	Originally posted by codiac2600 Thank you everyone for the support and everything seems to be in order now. It was a tough time and it really sucked having to go through it, but I'm going to change a few things even though it's difficult to do personally. You can read about it and what I've done on my web blog at Photography 2.0 - Uconventional - Unrestriced - Unreal- powered by SmugMug just click on NEWS in the navbar. Dude, I hate to tell ya... but your images aren't "protected" in any way. It takes me 5 seconds to disable JavaScript (Tools \| Options \| Content in Firefox), and then I can copy the images same as always. Using Flash would be even more annoying, and equally ineffective... Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story.

04-03-2008, 12:48 PM	#72
codiac2600 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Rockford, Illinois Posts: 2,027 Original Poster	Originally posted by moxfyre Dude, I hate to tell ya... but your images aren't "protected" in any way. It takes me 5 seconds to disable JavaScript (Tools \| Options \| Content in Firefox), and then I can copy the images same as always. Using Flash would be even more annoying, and equally ineffective... Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story. There is more, all my new images that upload will have an ugly copyright right through the center of the image. Not too mention 90% of people do not know how to disable the right-click feature, so it's ok that you can.

04-03-2008, 12:56 PM	#73
moxfyre Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 86	Originally posted by codiac2600 There is more, all my new images that upload will have an ugly copyright right through the center of the image. Ah, gotcha. Well, putting a watermark/copyright splotch is certainly more effective in preventing misuse, I think! Originally posted by codiac2600 Not too mention 90% of people do not know how to disable the right-click feature, so it's ok that you can. People who are likely to steal your images and actually use them for commercial purposes, where you'd have a financial interest in stopping them, are likely to know how to do this. If it gives you peace of mind, keep it, but...

04-03-2008, 01:04 PM	#74
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	Originally posted by moxfyre Technical measures to prevent copying/downloading/ripping DO NOT WORK. If a user can see the image, they can make a perfect copy of it. End of story. Yup. Hit printscreen and paste into photoshop then crop. Defeats any protection.

04-03-2008, 01:39 PM	#75
codiac2600 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Rockford, Illinois Posts: 2,027 Original Poster	Here is the garbage I had to attach to my photos... ugh is it ugly