Protecting photos...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I'm curious... Most music sites these days create their own extensions,
which allows them the protect the music file and control the number of copies
made. (I know it's not fool-proof, but...) As I understand it, most of
these formats are basically modified MP3 files.

Is there a way to do that with images? Does FrontPage and ISP servers
allow you to define your own image extension? If they do - how do I find
out about it. If defining my own extension to my images would slow down the
number of mis-uses, it would be worth the effort.
 
Is there a way to do that with images?

No. Your best (and only) bet would be to watermark the images.
 
I'm already doing that... But copyright violation is one of the biggest
issues facing image-based websites, and it's astonishing that Microsoft and
other vendors have put forth no thought into ways of protecting images...
they've certainly done somersaults to protect music!

If there's any other ideas out there - I'd love to hear them...
 
I'm already doing that... But copyright violation is one of the biggest
issues facing image-based websites, and it's astonishing that Microsoft
and
other vendors have put forth no thought into ways of protecting images...
they've certainly done somersaults to protect music!

You don't understand the problem. Computers are just fancy adding machines.
An image is simply a very long array of numbers. It is the computer that
translates these numbers by painting pixels on the computer screen, or to a
printer. When you view a web page, your computer must download these numbers
from the server in order to be able to display them. It's not a television,
you know. Now, imagine that you went to a library that contained lists of
numbers, and you borrowed a list of numbers from the library to take home
and read. Once you get the list home, what's to stop you from copying those
numbers onto a piece of paper?

In fact, copyright laws were created because it is simply not possible to
prevent ANYTHING from being copied. People think that this is a new issue.
People have been copying "intellectual property" ever since the invention of
language. Before the invention of written language, they memorized what
people said. Then they copied written language by hand. This is what the
Scribes of Biblical fame did. The invention of the printing press enabled
information to be copied quickly using an automated process. And of course,
artists have "copied" what they saw since cave men. Later,this was improved
with the invention of photography. And the computer was preceded by many
such inventions, such as phonograph records, magnetic tape, photo-copiers,
radio and television (ever video-taped a program off of your tv?).

Now, consider the computer, a machine that was invented to be able to copy
and manipulate numbers perfectly. Anything stored in a computer is stored as
numbers. So, rather than getting a facsimile of the object being copied,
like a copier does, a computer creates an *exact* copy, as easy as pie. In
fact, that is what downloading *is*.

As for the "somersaults" you mentioned, let's just say that, regardless of
the ignorance of the average human being regarding such things, companies
like Microsoft make money by giving people what they want. When large groups
of people ignorantly clamor for something which technicians know darned well
can't be done, the dance of perception begins. You don't increase sales by
telling people that they are ignorant, and that they are asking for
something impossible. But sales are increased by the perception of the
customers. Or, as the old saying goes, "perception is everything." So,
software and hardware companies make every effort to create the *perception*
that they are solving the problem. Fooled you, didn't they?

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Chicken Salad Alchemist

What You Seek Is What You Get.
 
And...for every somersault there's an equal and opposite somersault.



|> I'm already doing that... But copyright violation is one of the biggest
| > issues facing image-based websites, and it's astonishing that Microsoft
| > and
| > other vendors have put forth no thought into ways of protecting
images...
| > they've certainly done somersaults to protect music!
|
| You don't understand the problem. Computers are just fancy adding
machines.
| An image is simply a very long array of numbers. It is the computer that
| translates these numbers by painting pixels on the computer screen, or to
a
| printer. When you view a web page, your computer must download these
numbers
| from the server in order to be able to display them. It's not a
television,
| you know. Now, imagine that you went to a library that contained lists of
| numbers, and you borrowed a list of numbers from the library to take home
| and read. Once you get the list home, what's to stop you from copying
those
| numbers onto a piece of paper?
|
| In fact, copyright laws were created because it is simply not possible to
| prevent ANYTHING from being copied. People think that this is a new issue.
| People have been copying "intellectual property" ever since the invention
of
| language. Before the invention of written language, they memorized what
| people said. Then they copied written language by hand. This is what the
| Scribes of Biblical fame did. The invention of the printing press enabled
| information to be copied quickly using an automated process. And of
course,
| artists have "copied" what they saw since cave men. Later,this was
improved
| with the invention of photography. And the computer was preceded by many
| such inventions, such as phonograph records, magnetic tape, photo-copiers,
| radio and television (ever video-taped a program off of your tv?).
|
| Now, consider the computer, a machine that was invented to be able to copy
| and manipulate numbers perfectly. Anything stored in a computer is stored
as
| numbers. So, rather than getting a facsimile of the object being copied,
| like a copier does, a computer creates an *exact* copy, as easy as pie. In
| fact, that is what downloading *is*.
|
| As for the "somersaults" you mentioned, let's just say that, regardless of
| the ignorance of the average human being regarding such things, companies
| like Microsoft make money by giving people what they want. When large
groups
| of people ignorantly clamor for something which technicians know darned
well
| can't be done, the dance of perception begins. You don't increase sales by
| telling people that they are ignorant, and that they are asking for
| something impossible. But sales are increased by the perception of the
| customers. Or, as the old saying goes, "perception is everything." So,
| software and hardware companies make every effort to create the
*perception*
| that they are solving the problem. Fooled you, didn't they?
|
| --
| HTH,
|
| Kevin Spencer
| Microsoft MVP
| Professional Chicken Salad Alchemist
|
| What You Seek Is What You Get.
|
|
|
| | > I'm already doing that... But copyright violation is one of the biggest
| > issues facing image-based websites, and it's astonishing that Microsoft
| > and
| > other vendors have put forth no thought into ways of protecting
images...
| > they've certainly done somersaults to protect music!
| >
| > If there's any other ideas out there - I'd love to hear them...
| >
| > "Murray" wrote:
| >
| >> > Is there a way to do that with images?
| >>
| >> No. Your best (and only) bet would be to watermark the images.
| >>
| >> --
| >> Murray
| >> --------------
| >> MVP FrontPage
| >>
| >>
| >> | >> > I'm curious... Most music sites these days create their own
| >> > extensions,
| >> > which allows them the protect the music file and control the number
of
| >> > copies
| >> > made. (I know it's not fool-proof, but...) As I understand it,
most
| >> > of
| >> > these formats are basically modified MP3 files.
| >> >
| >> > Is there a way to do that with images? Does FrontPage and ISP
servers
| >> > allow you to define your own image extension? If they do - how do I
| >> > find
| >> > out about it. If defining my own extension to my images would slow
| >> > down
| >> > the
| >> > number of mis-uses, it would be worth the effort.
| >> >
| >> >
| >>
| >>
| >>
|
|
 
Back
Top