I was watching that old classic film, Big, and wanted to know who played Tom Hanks as a kid. So, off I went to Google and typed in "Big Cast" (no quotation marks) and there is a long list of images along the top, that scroll. (A bit like jquery).
One of the challenges in correct attribution is that a growing number of sites are serving their images from a different hostname, if not a different domain altogether (via the cloud or a CDN.) This method of serving images improves page load time - it allows the browser to make more simultaneous HTTP connections.
But it also complicates the idea of original source a good bit. The relationship of the hostnames can look just like hotlinking, and no search engine can assume that images for a page must be served from the same domain as the html. That's not a reason to abandon ship on the challenge, however, but it does make the job more difficult.
[edited by: tedster at 12:46 pm (utc) on Sep 26, 2012]
12:23 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
Btw..lest any one should think that my reaction to "carousel" and that of other image creators is trying to stop people having access to images for free..I personally ( and I know very many others who do the same ) give many hundreds , if not thousands of Images every year to wikipedia..photographs , illustrations etc..very many of which are used by them, and thus if used by Google or anyone else, I have and I'd have no objection to their use, on the "carousel" or other websites..
12:33 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
@Leosghost you just keep making my case as it's not Google that's the problem, it's the scrapers, and .htaccess and anti-scrape scripts can stop them. Proactive copyright protection vs. reactive copyright protection because it's always easier to keep the cow in the barn than get it back in once it's loose. Another problem is if you don't allow images to be indexed, which many don't, the scrapers have an easier path to becoming the 'author' since no SE has seen the image before.
Image indexing: damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I've got some harrowing stories from both sides of the coin and one involved a 3rd party that built their own carousel a few years back. They started by directly leeching my stuff which I quickly stopped in .htaccess. Then they leeched the same images from Google images so I whacked all the images out of Google images via G's WMTs and totally broke their site :)
FWIW, if you haven't tried Tin Eye, the image search engine (if it's still online), it's a real eye opener of where it find images being used on the web. Real impressive too as it even found images combined in new images, cool technology.
12:51 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
IncrediBill..the firefox add on I mentioned is currently not stopped by any script that I'm aware of ( and you know that I have looked into this subject more than most ) except mine..
And of course I know about tin eye..and Google's own upload and match image search..I've followed their evolution very carefully since they began..
That, and the fact that Google never inadvertently include any images from Getty etc in their image SERPS or "carousel" is why I say Google can "attribute" images accurately, but they have chosen ( apart from those that they have pre sorted as belonging to commercial image banks, and therefore not to be included in the "found" pool ) not to use what they can do with image "attribution" when returning images in "carousel"..because implementing use only "authorised copyright free" via their working algos for "source attribution" ( and thus exemption of all else from inclusion ) would severely cut back on the images that they could "find"/ use..
If they have the means of knowing that the cow they found in another barn, or roaming loose, originally came from my barn,( and they can and do do that with Getty's cows ) and is mine..then they should not be trying to take it to their show..as a free-range ( has no owner, can do with it what we want , copyright free ) cow..
1:05 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
Been out for a while, just rolled it out globally a week or so ago.
It has been more than 1 month, i had checked for Indian films many times.
firefox add on I mentioned is currently not stopped by any script that I'm aware of
Might be some way to detect it, I've never looked at it specifically. However, that's something used manually and doesn't create the same amount of havoc that scraper scripts cause.
Ounce of prevention, pound of cure, blah.
2:50 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
The largest text contentscraper / spinner on the net ehow ..is manual human powered ..causes enough "havoc" to those who they outrank that they have sourced /scraped from..
Now we also have the meteoric rise of the human powered image scrapers pinterest*, and it's clones, and ehow's spark* etc..Google already returns images scraped by their hordes above many of the sites that they scraped the images from, they now have vast amounts of content which is not theirs, they are amassing vast amounts more, via their human scrapers every hour ..and Google includes / indexes it all ..and so can use it as "found"..for "carousel"..it already is in Google's image search index..
*Thanks to incrediBill :)..( we two do get on very well, in spite of what may seem to be the case, to those who only "skim" posts ) ..there is now an easily applied way to stop pinterest [webmasterworld.com...]
and also to stop spark [webmasterworld.com...] #msg:4492820 that does not rely upon proprietary tags..
6:07 pm on Sep 26, 2012 (gmt 0)
Link posted by helleborine in another thread here [webmasterworld.com] msg:4500316..highly relevant...