Posting of images, which are not your own

[admin]

Some forum users might want to upload and post images, for which they do not own the copyright. I would kindly ask you *not to upload and attach* these pictures. Please make a *link* to these pictures. You can do this by placing the link to the file in the following tags:

[img]http://www.microbehunter.com/wp/wp-cont ... moss_1.jpg[/img]

This will then display the picture inline. The reason is, that uploading a picture is a copyright violation (if you do not make the picture yourself), and making a link to the picture is not.

Thanks, Oliver.

[The QCC]

The

Code: Select all

[img][/img]

only works if the website has NOT enabled HotLink Protection.
For example, images on my web site have HotLink Protection enabled.

[Dennis]

I don't know what he is saying but could put a link to it with url tag if you I guess right click on pic, might get complicated.

Just saying to have their pic appear here is stealing bandwidth from their server.

-Dennis

[The QCC]

Just saying to have their pic appear here is stealing bandwidth from their server.

Hot Link protection prevents other web sites from using your bandwidth. It does not prevent copying your images.
There is no 100% way of preventing somebody gaining access to your images.

[Dennis]

I am just saying I am guilty.

Say some website has a picture, yes you can find the link to just their picture and not to their whole webpage and view the picture through the pictures url, even post the url here to be opened.

When you open that url bandwidth comes from their server and the picture was supposed to be seen as part of their web page. I speak out of experience from 1998 etc... early days of the web when everyone's thing was to make a webpage but many were on WebTvs and had no computers but terminals (WebTV and it was easy to put a pic on your page coming from someone else's site.



TEST- the above img is from my website. Did I say you can use it? Right now it is pulling bandwidth from densdoor.angelfire.com also.

Even a link actually would be sort of stealing as I intended a pic to be used with my page.

All this hot link protection talk is sort of like saying Hey it wasn't wrong for you to rob my home because I left the back door unlocked.

I see what you are saying- Talking on a side way about Hotlink protection, well that is another topic, one robbing (our topic) and one installing locks. (hotlink) the above talk- robbing fits us. the locks one is almost irrelevant since I bet 99% of the internet is not protected from taking images.

-Dennis

[Oliver]

Hello,

Yes, it is correct that hot linking might be also considered "stealing" of bandwidth or of the image, because you make it appear that someone elses image is your own. And indeed there have been cases like this before. I remember from the news that a company once sued for embedding weather charts or maps.

The situation here in Europe (Germany and Austria in particular) is that the courts do see a difference between hotlinking (deep-linking) and attaching the image. The reason is, that when hotlinking a picture, the website owner does not actually "reproduce" or copy the image. The image is not duplicated.

But there is also a limit. If I were to make a whole website only with hotlinked images, then this might also be considered problematic. It is best to link to the whole website or if hotlinks are made, that these are commented. Because in this case one can still argue that the picture is a scientific "citation", which is again allowed. But I admit that the issue is more complex and strict with images than with text.

There have been arguments now, that even watching (!!) am image online by opening the website can be considered a copyright infringement, because the computer automatically downloads the image for displaing it. In order to protect the Internet users from being sued, these "transitional" copies are exempt from the copyright (by law, at lesat in my country).

I remember one court case, where a company even sued because another website put a normal link (not a hotlink) to the company's website. But the courts rejected that because this is in the very nature of the Internet to put links.

All this hot link protection talk is sort of like saying Hey it wasn't wrong for you to rob my home because I left the back door unlocked.

Yes. The owner of a picture can determine how and how not the picture can be used, regardless if it is copyprotected or not. If the image is copy protected, then this might give the owner a better starting position in a court case, because it is then clear that the owner did not want the image to be copied.

This whole copyright issue is quite complex.....

Oliver