Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Photo Rights Protection On Airliners.net  
User currently offlineAdministrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11412 times:

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.

Johan Lundgren
Editor Airliners.net

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)
176 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4280 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9674 times:

Well, I really could not try this demo as it is not Mac freindly, but I am hopeful.


"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineBodobodo From Canada, joined May 2000, 553 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9598 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.


User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 41
Reply 3, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9550 times:

Wow, finally something that protects our work!

pretty impressive if you ask me, just run the demo and I guess this is what we need to protect all our images from copyright violation and theft.

Hmmm on a second thought, it has certainly it's good sides but also some bad ones.
The good and honest people suffer again, but that is the way the world goes these days.

I guess from now on you have to contact the respective photographer for a copy if you want to use it as wallpaper.

Other than that I fully support the software if it will be implemented.

Good job as always Johan.


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4164 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 9524 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?

User currently offlineBrainStorm123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 9496 times:

Hi there,

Well I have tried this software and seems to work fine to me.

I did I could copy the image (hold left mouse button then move over the image to make it selected blue and then copy the image but it did not work)

So the software looks good and proffesional to me.

And it will solve a lot of diffrent copyright questions.

Good luck with the new software (if you do purchase it)

 Smile with the best regards,

Jeffrey van Beek- AMS - Netherlands

User currently offline9A-CRO From Croatia, joined Jun 2000, 1574 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9489 times:

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...
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4280 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9476 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.


"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineChris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9466 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)

anyway, cheers to whatever the decision...


User currently offlineNscaler From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 243 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9426 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.

Saul Loeb

User currently offlineEDIpic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9423 times:

I have tried the demo:
I agree with the points made by 9A-CRO.
It will be real downer/restriction of use for
the viewing public.


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 27
Reply 11, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9420 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
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 41
Reply 12, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9419 times:

Chris28_17 wrote:
"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.


User currently offlineChris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9396 times:

wow vasco, i admit i never noticed that before...  Innocent

doesnt really change my mind though...


User currently offlineRyu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 512 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9424 times:

I am fully for the protection of copyright. However, it appears that this software will only work on current browsers on Windows platforms. See: http://www.vyou.com/pubcomponent.asp?sect=pubsystem&pid=24

I use Linux, and if airliners.net becomes a Windows-only web site, then I will regretfully have to stop using it, as I absolutely will not boot into Windows simply to access a single web site.

User currently offlineBodobodo From Canada, joined May 2000, 553 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9389 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.


User currently offlineRyu2 From Taiwan, joined Aug 2002, 512 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9357 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.

User currently offlinePlaneboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9379 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 -

User currently offlineCliffie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9337 times:

Well, I'm just a little light here at a.net, but believe me even as participant (photographer) I wouldn't download some plug-in that cuts down the abilities of my browser.

With every additional piece of executable you risk one more backdoor in your system.

My 2 cents.

Ingo Richardt

User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4280 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9313 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.


"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineMikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9323 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".

It's a good idea, just not for airliners.net


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11200 posts, RR: 57
Reply 21, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9291 times:

I think its good Johan. One quick question though. Will users still be able to save photos on airliners.net to there desktop as wallpapers? Just wondering, doesn't really matter to me.  Smile

"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offlineRyeFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9292 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.

User currently offlineAdministrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Reply 23, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9400 times:

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.

Thank you,
Johan Lundgren
Editor Airliners.net

Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
User currently offlinePascuzzi From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 20 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (15 years 3 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9278 times:

Dear 9A-CRO

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.

Edward Pascuzzi

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
29 Glenn : I am all for it Glenn Alderton
30 Scooter : Keep in mind that may people access this site from places in which they have no control (or ability) to add support software. As a budding aviation ph
31 BO__einG : Interesting. But How will this cope with new problems if they arise. Which already some are starting to form such as objections and perhaps a certain
32 BA : I 100% agree with USAir_757. I do not like the idea that people have to pay to download a photo. Most of the photographers on airliners.net upload the
33 Ikarus : Is it possible to give this protection only to individual photographers, who want it, and not to every photograph? I am not professional in any way, I
34 Glenn : I am sorry, where does public domain come from ????? I work on sites that are definately not public doamin and as the Internet derives from Military u
35 Dazed767 : Right now I'm 50/50 on the situation. I am tired of the copyright violations though, but restricting the use of the photos like this seems like a litt
36 USAir_757 : Glenn, you're missing the point. I'm all for the protection part. However, here in the USA, those under 18 CANNOT aquire credit cards. This makes me t
37 Ned Kelly : I found this great website by accident a couple of months ago whilst searching for some decent wallpaper of aircraft. I liked it so much I added it to
38 Aus_spotter : I'm for the addition of something that will stop the copyright violations but I'm not too sure about charging for photos. I don't take photos to make
39 Mikephotos : Well one way to solve the credit card problem would be to setup a program like "airliners.net bucks". You send Johan a check/money order/cash for say,
40 A380-200 : Hi all, Overall - in favour of some protection for my/our shots...so leaning towards YES. Scooter...putting a picture on the Internet does not make it
41 YHU : I have to agree with many people here and say NO to the idea. On many occasions I have had people in my office ask about an aircraft they will be flyi
42 BA : I think Airliners.net should stay the same as it is right now. There is no way to make it 100% copyright violation proof. If someone is desperate to u
43 N314AS : Thank you Johan for this. Most people that have written to me regarding use of the photos, have asked permission. I don't mind their use as long as pr
44 Chrisair : Hi Guys, Let me throw my 0.02 cents in. I think it's a very good idea to protect the photos on this site. Locking the photos is a good idea, however I
45 LeoDF : Absolutely yes!
46 Tappan : I think Johan has made a successful effort to strike a happy middle by both satisfying people who think this is going to a "professionals only" site
47 Lanpie : Hi Mr. Lundgren, I believe, it is correct to improve copyright for the photos on airliners.net. Hopefully, that new system will not prevent the access
48 Tappan : US AIR 757, I am sorry, but you said this: "This makes me totally UNABLE to pay the charge, and therefore UNABLE to use any of these photos as my desk
49 Access-Air : Well I guess its my turn.... Personally, I think that the "pay for the picture" idea is not very practical.....as stated by several before, you would
50 Nscaler : Michael M, You mentioned the possibility of downloading high quality photos ready for print and I understand that this may be a feature of the new sys
51 A380-200 : Hi Gary (Access-Air), You state... "...altho the may be someone that comes along and uses my pictures without my permission, all so far have e-mailed
52 AKE0404AR : Very interesting discussion going on here, has been a while. I can understand both parties, the one who don't want to pay and the ones who want their
53 Bruce : Ok, I tried the demo and it seems to work. I can't think of how someone could work around this and get away with theft so it appears secure. I'm just
54 Post contains images Rindt : My .02 ... There are just too many cons right now to implement such a system. I'm all for image protection, but at what cost? It seems that most peopl
55 Post contains links AKE0404AR : Rob, I like the idea about the high and low rez picture, it is a damn good one but............there is always one, then instead of 130.000 we have 260
56 Mikephotos : Vasco, I couldn't get the link to work? Saul-I didn't mean that we'd charge only a buck or two for the high-res image. Just it would be available onli
57 CityBird MD-11 : hey, all If someone wants to download a photo - and pay the 50 cents or a dollar - do they still have to get permission from the photographer to use i
58 Pascuzzi : Hello all, I believe it was Mr. Orlando who stated, "...people who used my images contacted me first...."...well, what about the people who ILLEGALLY
59 Nscaler : Michael, Thanks for clearing up what you meant regarding the high res images. I can see how that would be helpful for those on a deadline. Also, to se
60 Post contains links Administrator : Again, thanks for your comments. Let me address some of your concerns: Young users without access to credit cards. Micro-payments is not yet a fully d
61 Thomasphoto60 : Now that the OS compatibility issue has been put to rest (at least for the time being), I certainly agree that there is a need for some sort of a solu
62 Chrisair : Johan, To cope with the script issue for the payment, why not get a couple "bookkeepers" online? How exactly would the payment work? Say I generate $1
63 Scooter : Well Johan, after your last post describing how it will work (along with other changes to the site), I think I've changed my mind. I like it... So...o
64 Kellmark : Johan; First, thanks for all of your concern for us and the integrity of the site. I see the advantages and think that it might work, but I have a few
65 Cicadajet : Johan, it seems you have addressed most of my concerns. No objections here. tom
66 PUnmuth@VIE : Hi! For Johan. Wouldn't it be a fine idea making a poll similar to that on the frontpage about your fovourite something. Wouldn't this make the proces
67 Access-Air : Sorry Folks.... Im still not convinced......However, I do see that a few noisey Phtographers are gonna get their way... Yes, This site belongs to Joha
68 Hawaiian717 : As a Mac user, I haven't seen the demo for myself so all I can tell about the system is what people have said. I also would be careful of "Mac's suppo
69 Mikephotos : Gary (Access-Air), If Johan decides to go with it, viewers are NOT paying to view the photos, only to download them. You make it sound like you have t
70 Hawaiian717 : Access-Air wrote: Oh and by the way everyone, isnt there an extra fee to have to use Pay pal ????? I don't think so. I was looking at them the other d
71 Cfalk : Johan, From home, the plug-in seems to work. But at my office, I cannot get the plug-in to run through the firewall. As someone said earlier, losing t
72 Flygga : Well I think this software is very cool. However I do not feel it would be right for airliners.net. If this was a professional site that was in the bu
73 Bruce : To Rob Rindt, I also like the dual-photo resolution idea myself. NASA has a pretty large image library of space-related images and they actually have
74 Post contains images Bruce : Johan, what do you think of yet another idea, much simpler (for you): Make all the photos non-downloadable and password-protected, and if someone clic
75 Post contains images PUnmuth@VIE : May be an indiscret question for Johan: Is the way of charging people for downloading hires pictures the general direction you wanna go with this site
76 BO__einG : Make that 76.. My mistake.. over 1100 views in less than a full day.. this is REALLY a hit.. Second to that it is the post that I had made recently ab
77 Chriskam : NO-NO-NO-NO! The very IDEA of the Internet is a free-for-all comunity, and when I or any other photographer on Airliner.net upload our work we aknowle
78 Moneyforme : I am excited that all the hard work put into my photos might pay off. Running around airports and waiting for the best shots. I would pay to print a
79 PUnmuth@VIE : --> Chriskam I personally don't accept the threat of theft or misuse. I wanna know who uses my picture for what. This doesn't mean I wanna make big mo
80 Tommy Mogren : Hi Johan, I very much like the idea of having the photos protected. That would allow me to upload my best work, without fearing copyright theft. I've
81 Post contains images Edlw : Hello, here is my 2 cents worth...: I don't look forward for this system of protection. Most articles above stated out my arguments before: We will lo
82 EDIpic : Hi I am work reading this. I've tried getting into http://www.vyou.com to try the demo again. I cannot get into that site! (Firewall) Need I say more?
83 Tommy Mogren : Hi Gerry, I am also at work, behind a firewall. But accessing that site is no problem. Are you sure the Firewall is the problem ? It really shouldn't
84 TriStar : All the arguments taken into account, I would say this is a good solution for both Airliners.Net and us, photographers. While, like most people, I'm n
85 Post contains images Cfalk : Bo, It is a hit because it is an issue that can have big-time ramifications on the future of this site. On the one hand, you have a site with nearly 1
86 EDIpic : Yes Tommy, it is. Firewalls are customised by system administrators. I now have to request access to that site. If not deemed necessary for business u
87 Dsmav8r : Johan, You have my support for this idea. Although, I do not agree with everything you have proposed (the $1 download fee for private use), I believe
88 Anton P. : YES! finally something that helps us protect our work!! I'm not worried!! Companies who wants to use our photos will still ask for it and ask us to se
89 Tommy Mogren : Ok, Gerry. Then your company is a very restrictive place. Of course, that not good for you. The clients you're referring to would most likely not have
90 Tommy Mogren : Planeboy, This is an excellent idea. Johan, is it possible to choose if you want to join the 'secure' part of it or not ? Or does the protection part
91 EDIpic : Correct Tommy So, if most views are for pleasure rather than sales, what is the logical conclusion? Gerry
92 Aj4035 : I totally agree that something should be done to avoid further copyright violations of our photos. I just don't know if the presented idea will turn o
93 Post contains images Christianbothe : When I came to airliners.net I had finally found a community of photographers showing their pictures to each other and the world. When uploading pictu
94 Tguse : Hi all, now that I have checked all the replies I still have to say no! I know many people who have large privat photo albums on their hard disk with
95 Post contains images Cfalk : Christian, The suggestion is not to make it pay-per-view. Under the proposed system, you can look all you want. The payment is only if you want to sav
96 Dee-see-eit : This topic is a really tough one. Here's my opinion about it: I'm doing all my photos as a personal hobby, and load them to airliners.net only to show
97 Ikarus : Just for the record: I am all for it now. Even though I know I will never get a single penny out of it. But I would really appreciate keeping the good
98 Post contains images Propfreak : hi all first of all I am pretty much on Access-Air's line. what I don't really understand is people bragging about to get some bucks back for the time
99 Post contains images Granite : Hi all Being part of the admin I have already written to Johan on my views. Having read all the postings so far I am basically thinking along the same
100 Ckw : I'll confess I haven't had time to read every message in this thread, so forgive me if I re-iterate some points. 1 - in general, I support the "pay fo
101 Post contains images A380-200 : At the risk of repeating a pun that might already have been posted... If this technology were to be implemented here, would that make airliners.net a
102 Eduard : Hi all already 100 replies, unfortunately I have not the time to read them all ! I have usualy nothing against downloading my photos for private use (
103 Tguse : Well said, Gary! ... and of course: Propfreak! Rgds, Torben
104 Post contains images Cfalk : Johan, It's tough running a site as a democracy, isn't it Courage, Charles
105 Planeboy : If someone pays to download a photo he can still violate the copyright - right? Or am I missing something here ? Generating money on downloads could b
106 Sukhoi : Interesting subject this one, but I dont think were going to find an answer here. I havent read all the threads but from what I can understand everyon
107 Vgury : Very good idea...
108 We're Nuts : Johan, don't do it. There are better ways. But if you do, I'm not going to badmouth you, boycott you, or stop uploading photos, but I want you to know
109 Bodobodo : Having read through the 100 or so responses I'm still convinced that this is not the way to go. I couldn't agree more with what both Propfreak and Gra
110 Mirage : So Airliners.net rules will be changed to satisfy 10% of the photographers (the pro's and the ones who think they are pro's). I don't care if someone
111 L_188 : I will have to check into this a little more before I give an opinion...... I do hope they will support LINUX and Mac soon..... Ok. Maybe not MAC but
112 9A-CRO : since I do not have access to any computer on which I can install that plug-in and see how it work can someone explain how will this software protect
113 Lewis : I don't like the payment idea. Although it is 1-2 dollars it will be more trouble to make the payment than the actual amount. I would prefer to have p
114 Lewis : I agree but not completely. As Johan said, it is up to us to decide and we will have to somehow vote (maybe a photographers-only poll?) in order for t
115 Mls737 : I think that's a good idea. I think that people would keep coming to A.net for the pictures (where else could you have as much choice and quality shot
116 Moneyforme : What's from keeping them from spreading the password around? Is that a threat also? I too stumbled upon airliners and loved viewing the photos. I sta
117 Post contains links Alanmoss : An excellent idea! I have sold a lot of pictures drectly from the site. I am sure some get used unlawfully. Keep up the good work, http://www.airliner
118 9A-CRO : when you download plug-in it has to copy itself in its folder this folder can be considered as system software folder on computers in companies and un
119 Lewis : Many of you talked about the effort you make getting the best pic and uploading it. Tell us Johan, what initially made you create the site. Whas it l
120 BC-12D : I'm all for copyright protection, as I've been burned by people using my images in commercial productions without permission. This site has generated
121 DerekF : I think everyone seems to have covered most of the topics and on balance I am against the idea, mainly because of the casual surfer, (as I am) who jus
122 Jamesnz : I think that wouldn't be a good idea. I have been discussing this in another forum with people like myself who use your site various times throughout
123 Jamesnz : I don't think these guys understand that aircraft photos aren't the only thing that get their copyrights broken! How about making people sign up, agre
124 BA : Johan, All I am saying is you can't completely protect the photos no matter what. No matter what software you have, there is always a way around. Besi
125 Moneyforme : We all know nothing is totally secure but who's going to spend time hacking to get free airplane photos when the Pentagon is much more interesting??
126 BA : Moneyforme, If somebody is desperate for a perticular photo, they can hack it. I'm sure there are some people out there, who the thing they want to do
127 Brissie_lions : Johan What I have seen on that thread is the amateur photographers against this move by you; whereas the professional photographers are all for it....
128 Invader : Strongly against ! After spending a couple of hours reading all the posts on this very interesting topic, I like to add my views as a contributing pho
129 Mirage : Just the idea that we must pay to download one photo to our hard disk, scares everybody away. Who is going to loose time filing some form and giving a
130 Mikephotos : I use airliners.net daily and can't tell you the last time I acutally downloaded a photo. Everyone keeps saying that airliners.net will be turned into
131 NikonF100 : I agree with Mike's statment. Well said dude. Gary Orlando, there are plenty of "big time contributers" check your facts... Scotty, that comment about
132 Brissie_lions : NikonF100 Don't insult my intelligence and don't think I hate photographers, because if you bothered to find out the full story for yourself before ma
133 Moneyforme : Mike I agree totally! Well put.
134 We're Nuts : Why don't we just prosecute offenders?
135 Mikephotos : My point about charging $1 for uploading by photographers is what I said. What have any of you guys given back to Johan thru a photo of yours being so
136 NikonF100 : Since when did Airliners become a porn site? Why are we comparing it to one? Regarding you as a photographer, I never said you weren't one. However, b
137 Rindt : Now you want to compare airliners.net with porn sites? That's just a tad pathetic to compare two TOTALLY different things like that. I had a feeling t
138 Mirage : This is why I upload photos to Airliners.net: "The Airliners.net photo section is meant to work as an online gallery for aviation photographers, givin
139 Flygga : OK this thread is starting to give me a headache. The fact is, Airliners.net is Johan's and he can do whatever he wants with it. He is providing a won
140 Brissie_lions : We're Nuts has said it. I thought it had been said before this, but I couldn't see it. I have thought exactly this...... PROSECUTE THE OFFENDERS!!. Th
141 Planeboy : Rather than pay for individual downloads, a yearly membership fee could be the way to go. Those who do not join should be allowed to view only. A "Vie
142 We're Nuts : Absolutely Scotty. I'm sick of do-nothing disclaimers which promise legal action that never comes! Sue them for all the law allows, that will send out
143 Bruce : Gary (Granite)....I agree with you. Some other thoughts: what are we protecting the photos against? Think about this: as has been mentioned in previou
144 Post contains images Hawaiian717 : I've been thinking again. Sorry about that... As someone has already requested it would be nice to see OS/browser stats for the site. That way we woul
145 TriStar : As it will go with all good topics, this thread is interesting in that respect that both parties have excellent points. There are some great arguments
146 9A-CRO : upload fee is terrible idea, if there was such fee I doubt that number of photos in the database would be more than 5000 I certainly would not pay 1$
147 Ned Kelly : Having had a further 24 hours to think about this since my last message, I have to say I am still against it. I once read an article that said (when r
148 Ikarus : Okay, probably someone has proposed this before - (I have only read up to about post 50) but: I think every photorapher should be able to give every i
149 AirNikon : An upload fee is a horrible idea. Unfortunately, many stock photography agencies are now charging a similar fee to maintain slides in their collection
150 Sukhoi : Well put AirNikon, that sums up my feelings exactly. Regards Paul
151 EDIpic : No flames. The message is quite clear. No to vyou. Gerry
152 Edlw : Yep, You said it - also for us (me & my wife) after reading almost all here - no to this system from here. Of course it is Johan's site... Dietmar
153 Ckw : I think there are some valid arguements against the proposed changes, and it won't in itself address the copyright problem as I've explained earlier.
154 Lewis : I was wondering Johan; how much will this thing cost in order to be fully operational? I believe that since most photographers say that you have spent
155 APP : Personally I get a kick out of getting photos accepted and enjoy the challenge of doing so, on the basis that 99.99% of AN users are like me, and love
156 BO__einG : To all. I too disagree with this. Even if there was a Tax.. How will it affeact the reputation of this site? Im sure it will have a detrimental effect
157 Access-Air : Flaming???? AirNikon, youre one of the biggest contributors to this website and I applaud you for your view point!!!!!!!!! I feel the very same way...
158 Vjl : I agree with APP and AirNikon. I think there are two situations here, and they've been bundled into one. Financing the future of A.Net is one issue, w
159 AirNikon : Well stated Vince. You picked-up where I left-off. BTW I am a KSNA type myself...
160 9A-CRO : I think that selling CD-s with photos is a great idea many people would buy it to have such collection accessible at all times and at home
161 USAFHummer : Here is my view after skimming through all 160 replies... I agree with USAir_757...paying is too hard when you are a minor like myself (my parents kee
162 Ozekria : Dear All, This is a very interesting discussion! I, on one hand enjoy downloading other people's photographs for use as wallpaper for my PC and also t
163 Tomh : I haven't had time to read all responses in this thread, but here's mine anyway. If I logged on to a site trying to charge me a fee to see full resolu
164 Lewis : I still dont think that the $1 fee would stop piracy. Do you think that those who illegaly use our photos would mind paying $1 or $2? I don't! How can
165 Cfalk : TomH, Under the current proposal, everyone can view the full-size picture for free, just as today. The fee would only come if they want to copy the pi
166 Ozekria : Dear All, Thanks very much to those who read my first message and also to those who have replied or reflected on what I have said. Please don't forget
167 9A-CRO : TomH, Under the current proposal, everyone can view the full-size picture for free, just as today. The fee would only come if they want to copy the p
168 EDIpic : Hi Omar, can I respond. "..if they wish to download a photograph, they would have to pay. Why would this deter people from visiting the site?..." Folk
169 Tguse : To compare A.net with an artist exhibition would be right, if there won't be other A.net-like sites that offer downloads for free. So the people will
170 Ckw : Seems to me most of the objections can be dealt with by keeping A.net exactly as is but adding a separate section for "commercial quality" downloads.
171 F27 : I recon it is a great idea why should'nt we get a little back for our efforts i know people who come to Airliners net and save photos. It will be nic
172 George : Hi all, I've read the most of it and my first thoughts where YES! after reading for about 80 posts I was thinking No. And on this moment after reading
173 Ozekria : Dear All... ...yet again!, Wow! This seems to be becoming quite a heated argument. Gerry, you obviously didn't like what I had to say. Fair enough, th
174 Edipic : Hi Omar No offence taken. I like a good debate and respect others point of view. Take care. Gerry
175 Post contains images Access-Air : Okay, up until now its seems that money and the prospect of making a lousey few cents per picture has over shadowed the copyright infringement subject
176 Post contains links Administrator : Photographers, Thank you for voicing your opinions and concerns on this issue. You guys have a large part of what makes this site so popular and your
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Underwater Photo On Airliners.net! posted Thu May 26 2005 18:58:59 by Andrewuber
Need Help Getting My First Photo On Airliners.net posted Tue Mar 23 2004 21:23:11 by Hannigan
My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Sun Oct 6 2002 03:18:00 by Continental
My Turn: My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Mon Sep 23 2002 20:49:54 by Usa4624
My 100th Digital Photo On Airliners.net posted Sun Jan 6 2002 13:38:17 by LGW
Interesting First Photo On Airliners.net posted Fri Jun 22 2001 05:32:25 by Planeboy
My 200th Image On Airliners.net posted Sun Oct 1 2006 04:43:52 by Rsmith6621a
Exif Data On Airliners.net posted Wed Oct 26 2005 21:34:11 by RayPettit
My Lucky Day On Airliners.net! posted Thu May 5 2005 00:58:29 by AndrewUber
Image File Size Compression On Airliners.net posted Wed Dec 1 2004 12:28:57 by Sulman
My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Sun Oct 6 2002 03:18:00 by Continental
My Turn: My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Mon Sep 23 2002 20:49:54 by Usa4624
My 100th Digital Photo On Airliners.net posted Sun Jan 6 2002 13:38:17 by LGW