Protecting pictures from copying

[Guest]

Is there is simple way to protect pictures on a website so that they can't be
copied? I am having a problem with someone stealing pictures and claiming
that they are her own. I have been using the mouseover replacement thing and
putting a blank picture as the replacement. That way, the thief can't right
click and copy, but I'm sure there's a way around that. Thanks

 

[Jon Spivey]

Hi,
Yes there is a way around any of those methods. Presumably you're an
artist/photographer? If so put a watermark of your name on the images - this
way your customers can judge the quality of your work but they'll be useless
to steal.

 

[Guest]

I now realize that there are quite a few posts on this topic so I will check
those out first before I waste anybody's time. But, if the topic of
mouseover disappearing pictures hasn't been covered, I'd appreciate a comment
on that. Thanks.

 

[Guest]

No, the theft is from a dog breeder's website and the thief is claiming the
dogs to be her own and that the puppies she is selling have better pedigrees
than they really have.

 

[Guest]

The thief is putting the stolen pictures on her website.

 

[Bob Lehmann]

Contact the thief's web host.

Bob Lehmann

 

[Jon Spivey]

I see. In that case how about photographing the dogs in front of something
like the dog breeders sign or business premises or perhaps have an
identifiable person in the picture holding the dog. Basically anything
that's going to be impossible for the thief to remove.

There has been a lot of posts in the past about disabling copying through
script and while it might stop the casual "thief" in your case I don't think
it will help as you have quite a determined thief. Bottom line is any
picture that is on the web is also downloaded to the users computer so it
can be accessed quite easily. The objective would be to make sure that an
any picture is clearly the breeders, this should discourage them from
stealing. If they're stupid enough to carry on copying you can go after them
legally.

 

[Guest]

We have tried that. They won't do anything unless the pictures are
copyrighted and we can prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the pictures
are stolen. Of course, the thief is claiming that we have stolen the
pictures from her and has placed a statement on her homepage to that effect.

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

Watermark the images.
If you have money (a lot) you can hire an attorney.
If the pix are film you can easily prove to the web host that they came from
your camera...if digital...dunno.
Of course if someone compared the real dog to the images she stole no one
would buy the dogs from her right?
You don't have to file a formal copyright for the images to be
copyrighted...if you took them.



| We have tried that. They won't do anything unless the pictures are
| copyrighted and we can prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the
pictures
| are stolen. Of course, the thief is claiming that we have stolen the
| pictures from her and has placed a statement on her homepage to that
effect.

 

[Kevin Spencer]

You must not have read all the replies to all the questions. If you see it
in your browser, it's already on your hard drive. The browser downloads
files, caches them in the hard drive, and displays them. Just because you
add some silly hack to the web page doesn't negate the fact that the image
is already there, on your computer (and everyone else's that has visited
that page).

When you add these silly hacks to web pages, you are in effect announcing to
the world that you're an ignorant amateur. And that just ain't good for
business. Take a look at some big professional sites that display artwork
and photography. You won't see that sort of stuff there. There's a reason
for that...

Check out the following web sites:

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/
http://www.photography-museum.com/
http://www.springgateart.com/
http://www.galaxyphoto.com/
http://www.pbs.org/ktca/americanphotography/

etc. etc. etc...

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Who is Mighty Abbott?
A twin turret scalawag.

 

[Guest]

Yes, unfortunately you're absolutely right. Trouble is, we have a lot of
pictures on the website and there really isn't a simple answer. I guess we
could add a watermark to all of them, but that will take a long, long time to
do. And even that isn't foolproof. We do have the authorities after her,
but that is a very slow process.

 

[Guest]

A lot of the older pictures are film, but the newer ones aren't. I don't
quite understand about the copyright - is there website where I can go to
read up about that?

 

[Murray]

Google pictureshark. It'll do them all in one pass....

 

[Guest]

Thanks! Sounds good!

 

[Steve Easton]

If they are digital images, they will contain EXIF information, which gives
details such as this:

ImageDescription -
Make - NIKON
Model - E5600
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 300
YResolution - 300
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - PictureProject 1.1 W
DateTime - 2005:11:21 16:29:45
YCbCrPositioning - Centered
ExifOffset - 228
ExposureTime - 1/192.5 seconds
FNumber - 8.20
ExposureProgram - Normal program
ISOSpeedRatings - 50
ExifVersion - 0220
DateTimeOriginal - 2005:11:06 16:30:48
DateTimeDigitized - 2005:11:06 16:30:48
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired, auto mode
FocalLength - 17.10 mm
UserComment -
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - Uncalibrated
ExifImageWidth - 800
ExifImageHeight - 600
InteroperabilityOffset - 856
FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
SceneType - A directly photographed image
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
WhiteBalance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 0.00 x
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 102 mm
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - None
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Normal
SubjectDistanceRange - Unknown

Maker Note (Vendor): -
Data version - 0120 (808530480)
ISO Setting - 0
Color Mode - COLOR
Image Quality - NORMAL
White Balance - AUTO
Image Sharpening - AUTO
Focus Mode - AF-S
Flash Setting - SLOW
Unknown - 5.64
ISO Selection - AUTO
Image Adjustment - AUTO
Auxiliary Lens - OFF
Manual Focus Distance - 0.00/0.00
Digital Zoom - 1 x
AF Focus Position - Center
Scene Mode - PARTY/INDOOR
Saturation Adjustment - 0
Noise Reduction - OFF
Editor version - PictureProject 1.1 W


If the "thief" wasn't smart enough to remove the EXIF info you can prove the
origin by comparing EXIF info of the originals to those on the "other" site.


--
Steve Easton
Microsoft MVP FrontPage
95isalive
This site is best viewed............
........................with a computer

 

[Guest]

Re: pictureshark
I have downloaded the program and have done the first 2 steps, but I am not
sure what it means by step 3 - output options. Can I stamp the pictures
right inside FrontPage, or do they have to be in a separate folder? (My
question doesn't even make sense.)

 

[Guest]

I have figured it out. I was saving it in the wrong place. Great program!!
Thanks again.

 

[Murray]

Good luck!

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

The second your image leaves your camera, or your written page prints on
your printer, it's your's. You don't formally have to copyright it..unless
you're gonna publish a book or something like that.

http://www.copyright.gov/

In the olden days we had to severally copyright photos, but I believe now
you can copyright multiples on one sheet. Check out the above link you
should find some stuff there.

Take the film negatives and just lay them in your scanner..you don't want
really good scans for this...don't crop them or anything...you want them to
look like strips of film. Email that to the web host of the offender. You
having the negatives should be enough to convince the web host that you
actually took the images.

BTW...legally going after a copyright infringer is mucho expensive and not
likely to bring you any return, because you have to prove monetary
damages...good luck. Unfortunately, he who has deeper pockets usually wins.




|A lot of the older pictures are film, but the newer ones aren't. I don't
| quite understand about the copyright - is there website where I can go to
| read up about that?
|
| "Rob Giordano (Crash)" wrote:
|
| > Watermark the images.
| > If you have money (a lot) you can hire an attorney.
| > If the pix are film you can easily prove to the web host that they came
from
| > your camera...if digital...dunno.
| > Of course if someone compared the real dog to the images she stole no
one
| > would buy the dogs from her right?
| > You don't have to file a formal copyright for the images to be
| > copyrighted...if you took them.
| >
| >
| >
| > | > | We have tried that. They won't do anything unless the pictures are
| > | copyrighted and we can prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the
| > pictures
| > | are stolen. Of course, the thief is claiming that we have stolen the
| > | pictures from her and has placed a statement on her homepage to that
| > effect.
| >
| >
| >

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

Good point!



| If they are digital images, they will contain EXIF information, which
gives
| details such as this:
|
| ImageDescription -
| Make - NIKON
| Model - E5600
| Orientation - Top left
| XResolution - 300
| YResolution - 300
| ResolutionUnit - Inch
| Software - PictureProject 1.1 W
| DateTime - 2005:11:21 16:29:45
| YCbCrPositioning - Centered
| ExifOffset - 228
| ExposureTime - 1/192.5 seconds
| FNumber - 8.20
| ExposureProgram - Normal program
| ISOSpeedRatings - 50
| ExifVersion - 0220
| DateTimeOriginal - 2005:11:06 16:30:48
| DateTimeDigitized - 2005:11:06 16:30:48
| ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
| ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
| MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
| MeteringMode - Multi-segment
| LightSource - Auto
| Flash - Not fired, auto mode
| FocalLength - 17.10 mm
| UserComment -
| FlashPixVersion - 0100
| ColorSpace - Uncalibrated
| ExifImageWidth - 800
| ExifImageHeight - 600
| InteroperabilityOffset - 856
| FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
| SceneType - A directly photographed image
| CustomRendered - Normal process
| ExposureMode - Auto
| WhiteBalance - Auto
| DigitalZoomRatio - 0.00 x
| FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 102 mm
| SceneCaptureType - Standard
| GainControl - None
| Contrast - Normal
| Saturation - Normal
| Sharpness - Normal
| SubjectDistanceRange - Unknown
|
| Maker Note (Vendor): -
| Data version - 0120 (808530480)
| ISO Setting - 0
| Color Mode - COLOR
| Image Quality - NORMAL
| White Balance - AUTO
| Image Sharpening - AUTO
| Focus Mode - AF-S
| Flash Setting - SLOW
| Unknown - 5.64
| ISO Selection - AUTO
| Image Adjustment - AUTO
| Auxiliary Lens - OFF
| Manual Focus Distance - 0.00/0.00
| Digital Zoom - 1 x
| AF Focus Position - Center
| Scene Mode - PARTY/INDOOR
| Saturation Adjustment - 0
| Noise Reduction - OFF
| Editor version - PictureProject 1.1 W
|
|
| If the "thief" wasn't smart enough to remove the EXIF info you can prove
the
| origin by comparing EXIF info of the originals to those on the "other"
site.
|
|
| --
| Steve Easton
| Microsoft MVP FrontPage
| 95isalive
| This site is best viewed............
| .......................with a computer
|
|
|
|
| | > We have tried that. They won't do anything unless the pictures are
| > copyrighted and we can prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the
| > pictures
| > are stolen. Of course, the thief is claiming that we have stolen the
| > pictures from her and has placed a statement on her homepage to that
| > effect.
|
|