• Please go to your preferences page and make sure your "See Mature Topics" setting is set. Setting it to "Yes" means you see the Mature Topics forum (contains political and religious debates). Setting it to "No" means you do not see those threads.

Image Watermarking

Status
Not open for further replies.

chevre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,434
Role
Diaper Lover
So, in light of the recent gallery issues, I thought of something that might make it less desirable to distribute pictures. What if, instead of (or I guess could be in addition to) posting just the ADISC / do not distribute watermark, there was a big watermark on the image listing the user name of the user viewing the photo. I'm talking like the sunken/embossed watermark that doesn't actually distort the image much.

Example of the kind of watermark I mean:


Could be in a lighter font or with smaller text.. but something that you can't crop out without basically destroying the photo.

But yeah.. I guess it's a bit more of a load on the server this way, but everything's a tradeoff :p.

So what do you think?
 

dinorider

Est. Contributor
Messages
530
Role
Diaper Lover
I think it's a good idea in itself. However, if we really want to keep pictures from being stolen by marking them we need more than that. To somebody who knows his way around Photoshop, removing this kind of watermark is a walk in the park. I made a quick 5 minute attempt on the image below. I really don't know much about the arts of Photoshop, and as such it's far from perfect. The point is that somebody with better skills wouldn't have any problems doing it properly:

 

Peachy

Banned
Messages
7,449
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Carer
WHo wants to spend 5 minutes on removing a watermark from each picture though...imagine how many pictures are in the gallery. If you want to just spread one single picture, it probably won't matter that there's a watermark on it anyway. If you just want to post a series of pictures elsewhere, you'll be wasting days of your life removing watermarks.

Peachy
 

Darkfinn

Banned
Messages
3,676
Role
Diaper Lover, Incontinent,
I personally don't see that watermarking would do a bit of good... just because it is marked "ADISC" or "Do not distribute" isn't going to stop anyone.
 

Jewbacca

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,076
Role
Other
I personally don't see that watermarking would do a bit of good... just because it is marked "ADISC" or "Do not distribute" isn't going to stop anyone.
But that allows Moo to take legal action against whoever is distributing/hosting the pics.
 

chevre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,434
Role
Diaper Lover
I think it's a good idea in itself. However, if we really want to keep pictures from being stolen by marking them we need more than that. To somebody who knows his way around Photoshop, removing this kind of watermark is a walk in the park. I made a quick 5 minute attempt on the image below. I really don't know much about the arts of Photoshop, and as such it's far from perfect. The point is that somebody with better skills wouldn't have any problems doing it properly:

Wow, that's actually pretty good, though the result is a bit blurry. To be fair though, the current watermark could just be cropped off leaving the interesting part of the image behind as-is :p.

And Darkfinn, I agree -- that in itself doesn't really stop much. Though, my idea was just to include the username so that it would be easier to decide who did it (obviously still not foolproof).
 

Verscha

Est. Contributor
Messages
272
Role
Private
Why not use some sort of Flash image viewer or something to stop people from saving the image?
 

chevre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,434
Role
Diaper Lover
That won't stop screen captures. Though it does make it less convenient (just like the javascript thing now that tries to block you from saving images). It can probably be circumvented other ways as well, if you are crafty :p (think youtube video downloaders).
 

Pojo

Est. Contributor
Messages
5,919
Role
Private
Just remove the gallery, or do something about personal pictures. You could have it where personal pictures are only for your profile album, or have some sort of personal only album that's really secure.
 

DannyTheNinja

Banned
Messages
852
Role
Private
Verscha and others:

If it can be viewed, it can be downloaded. I use Firebug to grab YouTube videos all the time. I personally think we should take off the right-click thing. It stops nobody, and it annoys the living hell out of me because I'm a big Javascript geek and thus can't stand stuff like NoScript.

IANAL, but the presence or absence of a watermark does not change your right to take legal action against someone who illegally distributes your work (or your users' work). The CYA approach is to make anyone who registers or accesses the gallery agree to something like:

TOU; not written said:
"By accepting this agreement, accessing, uploading files to, or otherwise making use of the Service, you agree to not redistribute, sell, rent, lease, or modify any of the content available through the Service except as authorized by the copyright holder. The operators of the Service reserve the right to take legal action in case of a breach of this policy. By uploading content to the Service, you grant the operators of the Service a limited license to distribute your content via the Service and, in the event of another user's breach of this policy, to pursue legal action against said user. By uploading content to the Service, your original rights are not affected in any way; you retain the right to distribute the content you uploaded to other places, as well as any other rights granted to you under United States copyright law, including, but not limited to, the right to license your work to other parties."
This ensures that:
  • Anyone who uploads pictures gives us the right to take legal action against people who leak our gallery
  • Everyone acknowledges that if they leak our gallery, legal action will be taken
  • Everyone acknowledges that they aren't giving up their own rights, they're just giving us limited rights.
Of course, breaches to this involve settling in court or threatening the person to the point where you settle outside of court, and settling outside of court would probably involve Moo's ninja-fu.

--Danny :ninja:
 

chevre

Est. Contributor
Messages
1,434
Role
Diaper Lover
I personally think we should take off the right-click thing. It stops nobody, and it annoys the living hell out of me because I'm a big Javascript geek and thus can't stand stuff like NoScript.
Yes, I too find it a bit silly. Even a novice web surfer knows how to disable javascript.
 

Peachy

Banned
Messages
7,449
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Carer
This ensures that:
  • Anyone who uploads pictures gives us the right to take legal action against people who leak our gallery
  • Everyone acknowledges that if they leak our gallery, legal action will be taken
  • Everyone acknowledges that they aren't giving up their own rights, they're just giving us limited rights.
What your legal gibberish is supposed to do is implied anyway. Just because something is available on the internet and just because it is possible (from a technical point of view) to download and redistribute it, it still isn't legal to download and/or distribute such material.

Peachy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top