On Posting Pictures - Hotlinking with IMG Tags and Copyright Issues

[Flaxen]

When you use the properties of a picture from its home site with the [IMG] tags, you steal their bandwidth every time the picture appears at the remote site (here). It's illegal. In addition, to re-post a picture you have not taken violates the copyrights the photographer owns on the picture. It's also illegal.

The "insert image" button is for pictures you have taken yourself (or have written permission from the photographer to re-post) and which are hosted in space your internet provider gives you, at one of the free hosting sites like Photobucket, or from an album here. For any other picture you want folks to see, please post just the link. Thank you!

[Gvnagitlvgei]

Hi, I'm not comprehending about this message. This is my own photo taken from my Canon digital camera. It's me. I should reformat it somehow?

[SimplyViki]

Gvnagitlvgei, you're fine. It's your picture, it's within guidelines.

Flaxen, does posting a link definitely not steal bandwidth? I clicked on a link to a picture someone around here posted, recently, and it took me to a webpage the owner of the linked website set up scolding people for hotlinking. But it was definitely a link I clicked on, not a picture with IMG tags. It sort of confused me!

[nowxisxforever]

Viki, maybe I can answer that one-- a lot of sites will make it so that if you try to grab the URL directly to the image, it'll link you somewhere else-- somewhat like what Flickr does depending on the settings of the person who put up the image, taking you to a blank picture, or perhaps a site scolding you for hotlinking.

Hotlinking is when you use their link inside image tags, causing the remotely-hosted image to be shown on another website each time that post/part of the site is viewed, yoinking bandwidth... posting the URL directly to a photo is different, and only loads up the image when that link is clicked on. The amount of bandwidth taken is much higher if you're putting the link inside image tags since it loads up *every time* it's accessed. I hope that explains it properly?

[SimplyViki]

I think I get it. Webspace is so confusing sometimes!

[Shiva]

Originally Posted by Flaxen

When you use the properties of a picture from its home site with the [IMG] tags, you steal their bandwidth every time the picture appears at the remote site (here). It's illegal. In addition, to re-post a picture you have not taken violates the copyrights the photographer owns on the picture. It's also illegal.

The "insert image" button is for pictures you have taken yourself (or have written permission from the photographer to re-post) and which are hosted in space your internet provider gives you, at one of the free hosting sites like Photobucket, or from an album here. For any other picture you want folks to see, please post just the link. Thank you!

For real? Because then your own avatar is a violation of these forum rules.

Also, I own a website... so if I host pics on it and post them here then I am stealing my own bandwidth?

I assume this goes for person albums, as well?

[Xanthippe]

Originally Posted by Shiva

For real? Because then your own avatar is a violation of these forum rules

The avatar is from Wikipedia (from the link in Flaxen's siggy). On the site it says that it is in the "public domain" which means you are free to copy it as long as you give attribution. For all intents and purposes, this would count as "written permission."

[Shiva]

Wikipedia is an editable website. Anybody could log in there and write whatever they feel like writing.

[Xanthippe]

Originally Posted by Shiva

Wikipedia is an editable website. Anybody could log in there and write whatever they feel like writing.

That's true. When we read something, it's easy to forget that someone else wrote it (be it a textbook or a poster or Wikipedia). Copyright of old paintings has been in the news fairly recently (here). I'm not an expert in copyrights, but most of the time when people talk about 'fair use' or 'public domain' images of two-dimensional works of public domain art, they cite this US court case - here - as precedent. The case involved applying UK law, but I didn't get a chance to look up specifics. So, it's being contested, but so far, it's legal in the US in this specific type of case.

[Flaxen]

Originally Posted by Gvnagitlvgei

Hi, I'm not comprehending about this message. This is my own photo taken from my Canon digital camera. It's me. I should reformat it somehow?

It only refers to using other people's work. You own all the rights to any picture you take, and you may post it wherever you like.

Originally Posted by SimplyViki

Flaxen, does posting a link definitely not steal bandwidth? I clicked on a link to a picture someone around here posted, recently, and it took me to a webpage the owner of the linked website set up scolding people for hotlinking. But it was definitely a link I clicked on, not a picture with IMG tags. It sort of confused me!

Use? Yes. But steal? No. A link takes you to a website where the bandwidth is used as it is intended. The webmaster pays each month, like we all do, and his website gets traffic. You look around. If he has nice pictures on the site, all the credit is his. Maybe that's the only place he wants his pictures posted. That is his right. Hotlinking redistributes the pictures and violates that right.

I read a humorous way of describing the situation. "You may give a person directions to the museum, but you may not steal its art." (unknown)

Originally Posted by Shiva

For real? Because then your own avatar is a violation of these forum rules.

For real. And no, my avatar doesn't violate copyright because it was published before 1923, and the copyright has expired.

Also, I own a website... so if I host pics on it and post them here then I am stealing my own bandwidth?

Not if you give yourself permission.

I assume this goes for person albums, as well?

Yes it does.