Page 2 of 4

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:46 am
by Highway of Life
*Christian* wrote:So...to what extent would/do you protect your website?
The best defence is a good offence.
For me, I just write up strict Copyright infringement restrictions, and have scripts to periodically search for duplicated content on other sites.
When I find duplicated content, depending on the severity... if it’s a fairly minor offence, I simply send them a C&D letter detailing how much the law suit will be (plus a couple million for myself) unless they remove the content.
For more major offences, which includes not complying with the C&D letter, I get in contact with my buddies over in Turkey to have them take down the site with hack.
I then phone my friends over in Pakastan and eliminate any personnel that may be involved. :twisted:
When these guys are not available, I bribe BertieZilla a large sum of money (though sometimes blackmail works well with him) to eliminate the offender(s).

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:22 am
by Phil
Highway of Life wrote:I bribe BertieZilla a large sum of money (though sometimes blackmail works well with him) to eliminate the offender(s).
In such case, isn't being eaten in your sleep a bit of a risk?

On a more serious note, I do much the same as HoL -- I've implemented various monitoring methods, and usually just issue a C&D. Depending on the severity of the infringement, I may end up getting a copyright lawyer involved, but have only had to do this once -- the issue ended as soon as the lawyer was contacted :roll:

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:40 am
by Highway of Life
iWisdom wrote:
Highway of Life wrote:I bribe BertieZilla a large sum of money (though sometimes blackmail works well with him) to eliminate the offender(s).
In such case, isn't being eaten in your sleep a bit of a risk?
No, I didn't say *who* would be blackmailed. :P
And no, eaten in my sleep is not a risk, I’d likely not make it that far...

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:24 am
by Phil
Highway of Life wrote:
iWisdom wrote:
Highway of Life wrote:I bribe BertieZilla a large sum of money (though sometimes blackmail works well with him) to eliminate the offender(s).
In such case, isn't being eaten in your sleep a bit of a risk?
No, I didn't say *who* would be blackmailed. :P
And no, eaten in my sleep is not a risk, I’d likely not make it that far...
At least being cut down by BertieZilla would be a noble way to die. Perhaps Lamb Cutlet is actually a reference to the state you'll resemble when the great BertieZilla is done.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 5:14 pm
by LEW21
There is only one good solution: release everything on Creative Commons licenses.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 5:53 pm
by drathbun
LEW21 wrote:There is only one good solution: release everything on Creative Commons licenses.
I'm sorry, but I must disagree. There is no "one-size-fits-all" solution. People have a right to protect their content.
MartectX wrote:Consider it a compliment and be done with it. :)
In my opinion, that sort of attitude is a huge part of why we're even having this discussion. Digital media is easy to copy. That doesn't make it right. You would not like me to come into your house and take your furniture and decorations just because I liked the layout, would you? Why should a web site be any different?

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:36 pm
by MartectX
drathbun wrote:
MartectX wrote:Consider it a compliment and be done with it. :)
In my opinion, that sort of attitude is a huge part of why we're even having this discussion. Digital media is easy to copy. That doesn't make it right. You would not like me to come into your house and take your furniture and decorations just because I liked the layout, would you? Why should a web site be any different?
It's different because I get to keep what I have.

The internet is a place of (let's say almost) unlimited exchange and freedom and I take it for that.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:04 pm
by drathbun
MartectX wrote:It's different because I get to keep what I have.
Oh, please, we've been through this before. It's not different at all. Just because it's possible, doesn't make it right. If you say "don't do it" and I do it anyway, is that okay with you? It doesn't matter what "it" is, whether it's physical goods or not. If you have spent years building a dynamic, flexible, world-beating web site design, and I copy it and steal all of your customers, how do you feel about that?
The internet is a place of (let's say almost) unlimited exchange and freedom and I take it for that.
It is not your right to make my decisions for me. Period. My content, my rights. Not yours.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 4:01 pm
by Al Knight
People add signatures on images (names website) some use watermarks which is rather annoying.
I'd be more than happy if my work flew around the internet, but I won't like it if someone else if profiting from it.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:11 pm
by EXreaction
Well, there is only a limited amount that can be done.

You can not protect images, javascript, or CSS. For my board, I have all the custom templates that I use in the template/custom/ folder. In that folder I have a .htaccess file so that the templates can not be easily copied. Of course they can be copied from the output, but that usually requires quite a bit of work.

You can put watermarks on images, but they are not pretty, and sometimes can be removed.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:39 am
by MartectX
EXreaction wrote:For my board, I have all the custom templates that I use in the template/custom/ folder. In that folder I have a .htaccess file so that the templates can not be easily copied. Of course they can be copied from the output, but that usually requires quite a bit of work.
Interesting. I tried that, but I get runtime errors in Internet Explorer when I enter the posting form. Something about a script and missing object. Same with Opera...

Firefox is ok, though! :?

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 2:43 am
by EXreaction
MartectX wrote:
EXreaction wrote:For my board, I have all the custom templates that I use in the template/custom/ folder. In that folder I have a .htaccess file so that the templates can not be easily copied. Of course they can be copied from the output, but that usually requires quite a bit of work.
Interesting. I tried that, but I get runtime errors in Internet Explorer when I enter the posting form. Something about a script and missing object. Same with Opera...

Firefox is ok, though! :?

It can not be done in the main directory because there are javascript files that are linked to in there. You would either need to exclude the .js files from being blocked, move your custom templates into another folder off of the template/ folder and put the .htaccess in there, or move your .js files and don't forget to update the links to them.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 11:14 am
by thecoalman
EXreaction wrote: You can put watermarks on images, but they are not pretty, and sometimes can be removed.
If you really want to protect it you need to use a large watermark preferably with an intricate design using a multi colored gradient fill. This will really make it look bad but will make it nearly impossible to remove with out a lot of work from someone that really knows what they are doing. I'd only do that if I was offering images for sale.

There are some other alternatives such as digimarc, this adds an invisible watermark. another option may be using EXIF/IPTC data for adding your copyright.

Both are not perfect, the invisible watermark digimarc uses will be obliterated by resampling, resizing or altering the image. I've seen information posted that it will survive this to some extent, the only question is how much alteration it requires before its gone.

The EXIF/IPTC can easily be removed, most programs that have a "save for web" option do this automatically anyway because it creates a larger file.

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 5:04 pm
by EXreaction
I have an idea to make copying the original image very difficult with using right click on images (or trying to view the original file linked), but it is too much to explain and could easily be bypassed by using the print screen button (if you can not get past screenshots, any amount of work is pretty much a waste of time).

Re: To what extent would you protect your site?

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:25 pm
by thecoalman
One way I seen mentioned you can "disable" right click is nest an image in a div nested in another div. Use CSS and z-index to make the outside div higher than the inner div. Apply a 1 px transparent gif as a background image on the outer div, when they right click there isn't any image to save because its empty div. The background image is just the transparent .gif ....

There is way to disable prt scr using JS but AFAIK it only works in IE and I'm not sure if it works in IE7.

Regardless every type of "protection" I've seen yet is easily disabled by my image editor, it has option for loading a web page as an image. It uses your default browser for the client so the server only sees the browser requesting the image.