incrediBILL - 8:21 pm on Apr 6, 2013 (gmt 0)
That is a ridiculous argument Bill..
Because some things are creative commons ..those who have their non creative commons stuff stolen should negotiate with the thieves ?
It's not ridiculous, it's a fact, and a point that you should be taking from this instead of nitpicking the details is the users, visitors, etc. have no way to tell the difference and the browsers have no blocking technology that allows us to stop them.
I'm pretty sure I made a cogent argument for simple technology that would inform the person that the image isn't for taking vs. all the images that are freely available.
You and I aren't the ones to decide how an image is used. Many a business owner slaps their domain name in the images they pay to have created and use it for free advertising already as it's embedded in the image and give them attribution.
The argument you can remove that from the image is because there IS NO DRM IN PLACE to stop it as the image editing tools should also block people that don't own the image from making edits as well as copying it.
I'm looking for a solution to the problem to stop it and not really interesting in the nuances of the issues surrounding it.
Let's put an end to it, at least and end for honest people doing it as scrapers will edit the binary but granny sure won't, so the discussion stops once and for all.
If the browsers, sites, and image tools adopt a common license DRM standard suddenly all the normal software updates happen and POOF! the problem goes away almost overnight.
J see it as a doable thing that's way better than my post on how to block Pinterest as it's just the tip of a very big copyright iceberg.
Plus a DRM solution in the browsers could also be implemented in such a way to permanently prevent hotlinking of images not licensed for the site linking the image.
I see a big picture solution here to a bunch of image abuse problems that can all be stopped with some very simple technology.