Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

[Sully]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Here's a previous discussion.

http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/showthread.php?t=7993

Sully

[spacegrrrl]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Tommy,

Doesn't really matter what you think. Copyright laws exist and use of an artist's creation without permission is copyright infringement. Ask any webmaster what action is taken when they are notified that copyright protected material is being displayed without permission on a website that they are responsible for. It is taken seriously.

If you want to use a photo taken by someone else show some courtesy and ask them first. Nine times out of ten they will allow you to use a downsized low res version provided you acknowledge who took the picture.

Lance

So no legal court proven opinion has ever supported that hot linking an image is a copyright violation. If someone can point at something that counters my postion please point me at your evidence. Please see the article that I referenced earlier in this thread. That said, it is largely held as something forum and web hosters strongly discourage.

When there exists simple technology solutions that prevent hot linking you have to ask yourself why anyone that don't want their media hot linked just doesn't make it impossible.

I think again the blog I referenced earlier makes a pretty compelling case that hot linking is totally consistent with the vision that created the web we experience today. For example, if you want to prevent folks linking your images, why in the heck are you putting them on the web in a manner that makes it possible? Why aren't folks worried about that preventing or even suing Google for their image search feature?

I'd also point out most of the opinions offered here aren't from folks that have any idea what they are actually talking about in terms of copyright violation as compared to theft and don't get me started on "fair use" which no one seems to really understand.

Bottom line, hot linking without permission is likely legal, but definitely rude. Why not try and be polite to folks that create interesting content and respect their feelings about how their work product works it way through the intertubes.

My suggestion to anyone that has media on the web that could be hotlinked and doesn't want it to be to make it VERY CLEAR on their sites that they do not want their content hot linked.

Spacegrrrl

[Lance]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

You can read title 17 of the United States Code or read the FAQ on this lawyer's website. Both spell it out clearly.

106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

Notice the word exclusive?

[Leo]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

I had several of my paintings and drawings copied and sold without permission. Not a darn thing i could do about because i did not have the lawyers to fight it. Bottom line, don't post it if you want it protected.

[AirDOGGe]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Technically, Hot-linking an image is not stealing the image, but it IS stealing the bandwidth of the site hosting it.

Hosts pay for their site's bandwidth usage, so using their internet account to display an image on another site without the viewer actually VISITING their site is taking some of their bandwidth for your own use.

Personally, I like to re-post an image to a free file/image-hosting site so I'm not using someone else's bandwidth without their permission, then include with the displayed pic a link back to the original page where the image was obtained for proper crediting reasons.


Note that I too have been "ripped off" before. I made models for a driving game, including add-ons like engines, tires, etc.

On day some years back I was informed that s0meone had taken my engine models and placed them on another download site, claiming credit for making them. I couldn't contact the thief, but a brief discussion with the download site host got them removed right away and the offending member's account closed.

[Apteryx]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Curious if Phred and others, that have not marked their pictures, would mind if the photo's were labeled as courtesy of "......." when used in an educational post, and not commercial one.

[spacegrrrl]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

You can read title 17 of the United States Code or read the FAQ on this lawyer's website. Both spell it out clearly.

106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

Notice the word exclusive?

Since you are neither a lawyer or play one on TV I choose to reject you reality and substitite my own! Read the blog I referenced actually written by a lawyer, I might point out. The issue is there is a huge grey area when you are taking an existing web site image and referencing it in a manner that removes some aspect of the context.

If you get to the technical aspects of hot linking via web browser technology no replication occurs. The image is still the original copy on the original site. If I was a lawyer and I'm not I'd base my case on the fact that the owner of the content made no attempt to prevent the hot link expression of their work when a clear simple method exisits to do just that. Such a lack of protection of the media in question implies an acceptance of that use. It goes to mitigation of potential infrigement and actions expected to be taken by a reasonable and prudent person concerned with control of their media in an enviroment where such use can reasonable be expected.

Again, my point is we aren't lawyers and the lack of case law to support hot linking as copyright infringement falls on the side that it isn't infringement legally. I asked someone that refutes that point to cite case law to support their postition. I maintain there is none.


So far the closest thing to "illegal" that has ever been presented as a legal theory is "theft of services" as a result of the bandwidth hit the media hosting site experiences.

So I'm happy you can read but I'd point out, so can I and I also know how to use a law library, or even easier, the Google... ;-)

Why can't just admit we aren't legal experts and fall back to it is rude to do it without permssion and realize folks that do should have had mothers that raised them better? :-)


Spacegrrrl

[Lance]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

I agree, I am not a lawyer and it is rude to take something that doesn't belong to you.

Fortunately my mother raised me better than that.

[spacegrrrl]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

I agree, I am not a lawyer and it is rude to take something that doesn't belong to you.

Fortunately my mother raised me better than that.

And that really is the point. We shouldn't need the "gun to our head because the law says its so" to let us know what is right. Someone makes something and they own it. Let's all be respectful of that fact. If we are "legal" shouldn't be the question. Doing the right thing by the "maker" is all we need to think about.

Seriously though, folks should make it clear where they host their media what their postion on this particular use of their media is. Then there can be no doubt about what the scope of the use of their work product is. It would also, I think, strengthen any claim they might have should they want to be a legal pioneer and persue some course of action in the courts for infringement.

Spacegrrrl
(who will only hotlink if I have the explicit permission of the creator of the content because as Wilford Brimley would say "It's the right thing to do!")

[Victor Archer]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Not what's right or wrong just my feelings on the matter...

When an image of mine is copied and re-posted without my name, that is not cool at all!!! A lot of aliens may visit you for some probing...

When an image of mine is copied and re-posted with my name but without my permission that is not cool... Some aliens may visit you for some probing...

When an image of mine is copied and re-posted and someone has asked me and my name remains, which some have I'm OK with that... You will be entered in a drawing for a mother ship key chain lazer...

If someone places a link to my gallery or an image I'm OK with that... And if I was asked in advance even better.... You will be entered in a drawing for a ride in the mother ship...

[spacegrrrl]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Me <=== hopes for a ride on the mother ship someday......

(now I need to come up with a reason to make the right kind of reference to the site to get into the drawing!)

Spacegrrrl

[Propellerhead]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Curious if Phred and others, that have not marked their pictures, would mind if the photo's were labeled as courtesy of "......." when used in an educational post, and not commercial one.

As the aggrieved party, here's the story about the image in question.

It was provided for an article that appeared in blog form and in printed form (In Flight USA). In both cases I received photo credit.

A link to the article would've been the correct and proper way to handle it.

You went the extra mile to find where the author had the image stored and hotlinked it without attribution.

Do I make money on this? No.

I provide images to my friends who enthusiasts and are not photographers for personal use and publication only.

Based on where you found the image, I consider it published.

Please take the time to show the courtesy next time around.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

There is something being missed here.. We actually have two separate issues. One is that someone is displaying someone else's images without their permission. That's bad.

The second thing is that if an image is "hotlinked" from a given website, hotlinked meaning that a website, say this message board, via the built in means that folks can link to images and make them show in a post on THIS site..

Without getting technical, if the source website does not grant permission to use the image LOCATED on their website, whomever is hotlinking the image is technically "stealing" bandwidth from the sourced server. Every electron served on the internet costs *someone* some $$ to produce and move it...

Hope you guys are getting what I'm saying here. There are TWO separate issues..

OK??

No more hotlinking unless specific permission granted by all involved? Keep me out of trouble?

TIA!

[T J Johansen]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

If someone places a link to my gallery or an image I'm OK with that... And if I was asked in advance even better.... You will be entered in a drawing for a ride in the mother ship...

Doesn't look like I will get even near the mothership!

In general, I have to say that having to ask for permission to place a link to someone's website is going a little to far. You don't have that right to claim privacy. As long as your website is in the public domain, and unless one is required to register and log on everyone can view it. We can search Google and access every little bit of info from your site. So to then say that I need to say pretty please in order to link to the site (or part of it) if one need to quote someone's opinion, refer to a photo, an article, etc. is just ridiculous and not in the vein of the internet as a source for sharing information.
I do note that you say you're OK with people linking to a gallery or image, so I trust we won't get into a slagging match with grinding teeth if I ever do so.

T J

[flyingjibus]

Re: Hotlinking images, a civil discussion

Well Wayne has spoken, this is his house so his rules shall be respected. I would like to respond to my offended party and then I am done with this.

As the aggrieved party, here's the story about the image in question.

It was provided for an article that appeared in blog form and in printed form (In Flight USA). In both cases I received photo credit.

A link to the article would've been the correct and proper way to handle it.

A hot linked image IS a link to the article, but I underatand what you are saying.

You went the extra mile to find where the author had the image stored and hotlinked it without attribution.

A google image search for "Rare Bear take off" is hardly an extra mile and not the internet subterfuge you make it out to be.

Do I make money on this? No.

I provide images to my friends who enthusiasts and are not photographers for personal use and publication only.

Based on where you found the image, I consider it published.

Please take the time to show the courtesy next time around.

Was that not your name in the lower right hand corner with the copyright info?

Honestly when hotlinking images I try to use ones that have that info there so the photog CAN receive credit.

I understand your postion and apologize for offending you, I was not stealing or attempting to take credit for your work. I know you guys spend countless hours and money to get these beautiful pictures for us, and I respect that you want to have control over how they are used.

That being said I recomend that people who dont want their images hotlinked take the simple steps to ensure this cannot happen.

I disagree strongly with some of the points in the other side of this issue. The points brought up in the blog that spacegirl linked to basically echo my feelings so I will not re-write them here.

I have lots of photographs posted on the web and many have been shown on this site. I have no issue with anyone taking those images and doing whatever they want with them, as I feel they are important peices of history and should be spread around and shared in the spirit of what the internet is and should be.

That being said, I will not hotlink images I dont "own" on this forum from this point on.