Administrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts. Posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 9855 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW SITE ADMIN
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am leaving for Stockholm on Wednesday to meet up with a representative from Vyou.com (http://www.vyou.com) to discuss the possibility to protect the photos displayed on Airliners.net with their "Vyoufirst" technology.
After all the copyright violation issues we've had to deal with lately, I have been searching for a method to protect images on the site without having to wreck the experience for our visitors by including large copyright signs all over the photos or limiting the quality and/or size.
I must admit I did not expect to find any software that would actually work. There's always the "Print screen" button right? Wrong. This software prevents even that use. I am really impressed. You, the photographer, would be able to upload your best work in the highest possible quality without fearing theft and the users can enjoy the photos in all it's splendor and full size.
Please go to their website as linked above and read about the technology. Check out their demo on photo protection (text protecting is not relevant to us) and try save, print etc to see that it actually works.
Ones you've read about the technology, please post a reply to this thread with your thoughts about it and what questions you would like me to ask the Vyou.com representative on Wednesday.
You are welcome to join me at the presentation if you happen to be in Stockholm on Wednesday. Contact me by email for more info.
PS. I have posted a reply further down that contains important information. Please read it!
I would also like to point out that this topic is for the photographers with photos on Airliners.net. Other users will have a chance to comment on the issue in a future thread.
Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
Bodobodo From Canada, joined May 2000, 553 posts, RR: 12 Reply 2, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8041 times:
It seems like a useful technology. I didn't have the time to check through every last detail but my main concerns would be:
1)Platform dependence: Will this work equally well in all versions of Windows, MacOS, and Linux? It would be a shame to lose a portion of the potential audience because of incompatibilities or the unavailability (for a particular OS) of the plug-in that's required.
2)Browser requirements: What is the minimum version of Netscape or Internet Explorer needed to view this. This might also shut out some computers which are not capable enough to run the latest browsers.
I think it's good to protect the copyright as long as it won't inconvenience those users who just want to view the pictures.
PUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4162 posts, RR: 55 Reply 4, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7967 times:
Supported Browsers are:
Internet Explorer versions 4.x or 5.x on a system running Windows 95/98/NT or 2000.
Netscape Navigator versions 4.5 to 4.76 on a system running Windows 95/98/NT or 2000.
In General I think it's a good idea, but wouldn't it also be possible thet some people won't come here any more because they have to download something they don't know about prior to viewing the pictures? I think that's the way it should work, am I correct?
9A-CRO From Croatia, joined Jun 2000, 1574 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7932 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
NO NO NO
why should you disable people to download photos
this would mean you can only view photos online - this is expansive and unnecesary - for some even impossible
I download pictures which I like and store it on my hard disk to view them later
I do (and many people out there) not want to get on-line every time I want to see some picture I like
this will do much more harm than good
photo copyright should be protected but this is too much
if this happens Airliners>NET will loose a lot more that it gains
(and also to mention there I have over 60 photos on this database (some of them unique) and I am not paranoid avout copyright protection
When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward...
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3779 posts, RR: 24 Reply 7, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7919 times:
For me the issue of cross-platform compatibility is important. As in my earler post, I stated that this does not appear to be a Mac friendly program... if this were implemented, how would that effect me as far as my uploads and viewing of photos here ? I would hate to think that we would have to change OS's in order to upload to enjoy A.Net. BTW, how many A.net Mac users are out there ?
Hopefully, Johan will have more answers after he retuns fropm Stockholm later thi week.
Chris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10 Reply 8, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7909 times:
At first i thought this was great..
im having second thoughts. First of all, a few weeks ago a website used my picture for an online newsletter, they were able to get it right from A.net, and i didnt have to bother sending them a copy, it was nice...
There are times i see a picture i really like, but then if i want to show a friend or something, i cant find it again.. (whereas now i would just save it... ) and personally i dont mind if people save my pictures and show friends or use it as wallpaper...
Although i am a bit paranoid about copyright violations, i dont think this is the way to go.
okay, this is a stretch, but could we possibly assign a person whose job is to search for copyright violations online? (such as the corrections editor, etc...) i think if anyone DID make a decent amount of $$ from stealing a photo, we would most likely find out about it... so i dont think locking up the pictures will be positive..
could we perhaps try the software out for a while, and then "undo" it if we dont like it? or is it too much of a project to just "undo" it?? (dont know much about puters)
Nscaler From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 243 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7869 times:
I think that you are correct in searching for new ways to protect the images. However, I feel that this is not it mainly for two reasons:
1. No more Mac users, which means you would lose an incredible number of graphic artists who only use Macs. Many people in this profession count on airliners.net for their aviation photo needs, without having to rely on the same old boring stock photos and losing these would be a terrible loss to the site.
2. Having to download a plugin. Larger corporations and businesses do not allow users to download and install programs to their computers because of security. Once again, you lose the business/ad agencies who look for photos to use from airliners.net
I understand the thoughts and reasoning behind more protection, but this isn't the way to go about it. The images here really cannot be used for any print purposes, but only for other sites on the internet. Out of those that have been caught stealing photos from the database, how many of them were simply online albums run by little kids? I don't think that we should lose the ability to sell photos from here (be able to have prospective clients e-mail us) by implementing this protection. There must be a better way.
Gerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 33 Reply 11, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7863 times:
I think your idea is great! On airliners.net are true masterpieces, which everybody can use for its purpose, be it private or commercial. To find all the copyright violations is just impossible. So better prevent it.
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
AKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2534 posts, RR: 49 Reply 12, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7862 times:
"im having second thoughts. First of all, a few weeks ago a website used my picture for an online newsletter, they were able to get it right from A.net, and i didnt have to bother sending them a copy, it was nice..."
That is a section out of the usage of photos on a.net:
"The digital photos on this site are licensed to Airliners.net. They are equipped with a footer with copyright and licence information and also carry an invisible watermark. If you receive permission from the photographer to use a particular photo, you may use a copy from Airliners.net as long as you inform us of the usage as to avoid misunderstandings (we do not appreciate and react strongly when finding our photos on other sites that use them without permission). We do however advice that you get a new copy of the photo directly from the photographer that does not carry our licence and watermark"
The internet may be a free resource but NAPSTER is a good example how it can go.
Shareware is fine unless copyright is violated and in our case it is.
As I said in an earlier post, the small honest person next door will suffer but if you really want a copy e-mail the person and maybe they will send you a copy.
I am pro this software ,of course all user input has to be taken into consideration and I am sure Johan will find a suitable solution to this ongoing problem.
Bodobodo From Canada, joined May 2000, 553 posts, RR: 12 Reply 15, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7832 times:
Having thought it over I personally would not go for this. In addition to the concerns that I mentioned above which would perhaps reduce the number of people able to view the photos as well as discourage others who don't want to bother with plugins I probably wouldn't opt for it even if it was seamless. I'm assuming that Airliners.net is supported by advertising and if this does annoy a lot of people then the traffic will go down and perhaps so will the advertising support.
I have a significant number of photos online here but I don't think I'm losing out by having people able to download my photo for free. As decent as the photos look on the screen they would make pretty bad prints and I can't see anyone using the photos here for serious commercial purposes. When I have sold images I either had to send a much more detailed scan or the original slide. The people who sent requests and were happy to use the online versions were all using them for non-profit purposes such as in a thesis, for an enthusiasts website, on someone's business card...
It's been discussed in other situations (eg. Hong Kong spotters throwing stones) how a few abusive people can mess things up for everyone else. This seems to be another example of the same thing. As much as I hate to see people take the photos and portray them to be their own on places like Webshots is that enough reason to mess things up for the majority of users who may want to download the occasional picture for their own use? Consider if you couldn't tape that TV show about 777's or Kansai Airport to watch when you get home from work just because on occasion a few people do the same thing and try to sell copies of it.
Ryu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 474 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7800 times:
How about a compromise -- make Vyou OPTIONAL for each photo at the photographer's discretion.
Specifically, allow the photographer to decide, at the time of submission of his or her photo, whether or not to display the photo using the VYou technology, so if he/she wishes the stronger copyright protection for the photo at the cost of restricting the audience, he or she has the option. At the same time, it is not forced upon every member of airliners.net.
Planeboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7822 times:
Once this system is implemented will it be possible for photographers here to decide if they want their pictures "Locked" ? It would be nice if this feature exists on this system - that way those who want to protect their pictures can - and those who don't mind their photos being downloaded for personal use could allow it. Just an idea -
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3779 posts, RR: 24 Reply 19, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7756 times:
I have to go along with the concensus here and say NO!. While Johan's heart is in the right place, I believe if this were put into place, a lot of photograhers/viewers as well as potential buyers would move on to other sites, simply because of OS incompabilities, annoying downloads ect..
I would ask Johan to re-consider this application, it appears just to be too restrictive.
Mikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 55 Reply 20, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7766 times:
I installed the plugin to test how it works and don't have any problems with accessing anything and everything on my computer. Except for the vyou.com site, all other sites, programs, files, etc..work as always. However, that doesn't mean I'm "for" installing this program on airliners.net. Yes, there are a few people who might misuse our photos but that's life. Even with this program installed people will eventually find a work-around. Plus, I'd hate to get 100 emails a day saying.."Can you email me photoid#00000 so I can use it as a wallpaper".
RyeFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1387 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7735 times:
As a Mac user only I wouldn't be able to use Airliners.net even if I wanted too. Its too bad if it happens because I know the site will loose a lot of members that would like to stay. Perhaps it would just be easier for photographers to have any photo that they are not willing to risk copyright violations against removed. There are always loop holes with computers but not if you don't post photos you are sensitive too. A simple screen shot can take a picture of this very page if you really wanted it. The photos are really only good for on the web. No one would pay the printing cost for a low dpi photo and companies using the photo for profit would most likely not take the chance since airliners are some what a specialty. The only threat is from personal web sites or for personal pleasure such as screen savers or wall paper. The prevention seems a little drastic since 95% or more of the people viewing the photographs are members of this site and will likely go elsewhere if they can no longer view the pictures with out Windows and a special plug-in.
Administrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts. Reply 23, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7843 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW SITE ADMIN
Thank you for your replies. Let me comment on some of the issues you brought up:
1) Support for MAC/Linux and other OS/browsers
Mac users account for only 1% of our traffic, Linux even less. Still, I agree you should be able to use a Mac/Linux while viewing our photos. Vyou claims they are constantly improving the software and I think Mac/Linux etc will be supported in the near future. I will not add the software until Mac is supported.
2) Ability for users to download photos for personal use
Users will be able to download a photo, save it and/or print it under a licence for personal use only. We will charge a dollar or two for every download. That dollar will be split 50/50 with the photographer who owns the photo. Using this technology, the user will be able to view the photo in full size and highest quality on the site for free. We will only charge the user if he/she wishes to save the photo on the hard disk and/or print it. No one is forced to pay any money. The site will be free to access as always and the photos will be free to view.
It costs money to run a high quality website. It costs money to take high quality photographs. You cannot walk into a real-life photo gallery, rip a photo off the wall and walk out. You will have to pay. Those users who don't belive it's worth a buck for every photo you print/save for support of the photographer and Airliners.net don't have to download.
Some people say we will loose traffic to other photo sites. Initially it might be so. But as mentioned, it costs money to run a site and those who do not generate any money will expire. Photographers will realize this and send their photos to:
1) Where they know their work is safe from theft.
2) Where the site will remain for all foreseeable time and their work on upload will not be wasted.
3) Where they will generate income to help finance their hobby.
Users will realize this and visit the site that:
1) Carries the highest quality photos.
2) Where they know the top photographers upload their photos.
3) Where they can, for a very small fee, receive a genuine licence to print and save a photo for personal use.
I know some photographers complain about high volume of emails they receive from Airliners.net users and they fear that they will receive even more ones this new software have been installed. We will create a personal page for every photographer where he/she can inform users about the photo policies he/she uses (like a small personal FAQ) as well as other info (and photos of yourselves!).
Regarding the plug-in that you have to download, it's only 200Kb big and will not change the behavior of your web browser in any way. You will be able to download photos and read text as usual. The only difference will be that in the future, you will be able to view the full size, high quality version of every photo on Airliners.net.
Finally, I kindly ask that only photographers currently with photos in our database reply to this thread. It's a lot to read and to begin with I'd like to know the opinions of the photographers. Other users will get their chance later.
Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
Pascuzzi From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 20 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (12 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7721 times:
While I only partially agree with your fears, it is a much better protection for the photographer to have a request in the form of an email to simply send out an image to a person who wishes to save it and look at it than to have to legally fight internet companies for permitting OUR (MY in several cases) stolen work to be sold under someone else's name. Perhaps you don't mind if people steal your pictures and sell them under other pretenses, but I DO mind it; I've gone to great lengths to get excellent photographs, and I take great offense to having some goofy outfit like http://www.webshots.com selling them without even checking what images their users upload.
I am all for this software if it means protecting everyone's images; even yours.
25 Pascuzzi: Dear Everyone, and Vngd4me too, While you do make a good point, you must realize that people whose photographs are appealing to those unscrupulous peo
26 EDIpic: Briefly, the plug-in may not get beyond firewalls. Surely a high source of hits (and popularity) to this site is from surfers at work? Gerry
27 USAir_757: I disagree, this looks like something that will screw everything. Something to make my browser take up more memory(it already takes up too much to beg
28 Cfalk: Putting in my 2 cents... On the whole principle, I do not object. This site has grown to a significant level of popularity and service, and most servi