My artwork may not be shown or used or illustrated in any manner whatsoever by any organization or writer or blogger or any other entity in an attempt to either "educate" or "illustrate" or "sell" anything related to, or not related to, heraldry and/or art without my written permission prior to showing or using or illustrating. Violating this will force me to seek legal remedy.
*Clearly by my sharing the art here I am giving AHS permission to use them for the purposes of AHS; there are a couple other places and individuals where I’ve given this permission in a like manner. This post is aimed at others who I’ve recently asked to remove my works, personal information and client information from their website(s), and who have done so, and those who would do so without my permission in the future.
This is a good point. There seems to be this idea that if things are out there in cyberspace that they are fair game to be shared. We put trackers on everything we build. That way we are able to track everyone who hits our art pages. We have a record of the visitors IP, the internet company they use to access the internet, their location as well as the time and date they visited. Knowing the internet company they use is especially helpful because if you do have issues with someone on the web then you can report them to their internet provider and they can monitor their activity as well. The company cannot of course give you any personal information about the individual when you call them but they can release this information to the authorities. This record is very important especially if you do find that you need to take action against an individual you find has ‘borrowed’ your artwork. You can prove without a shadow of a doubt that they have visited your site.
Speaking as the resident IT guy a couple of comments:
1. Trackers such as Google Analytics and the like are great but, not fool proof. For example, all my computers (work & home) are configured to not leave any tracks whatsoever with those services. As far as they’re concerned, I’m a ghost. (Yes, there are the web server logs but the majority out there do shared hosting)
2. Stuff like trying to prevent right clicking on a page does not work. you can see for yourself if you are using Firefox or Chrome as your browser by just keeping the CTRL key pressed when right clicking.
3. The above, if it does cause a problem, it will only be to the first one that copies it and you can only complain about them and nobody else. For example, if X copies the image and puts it on his website, then Y comes along and copies from there and puts on their website and finally Z does the same from Y, where does that leave you?
My recommendation for those that want to protect images is simply to add a watermark. It only takes a few seconds to add to an image or, if you want to get fancy, have a simple script that does it for you automatically for any image served by the website (for those technically minded, this can easily be done in the .htaccess file).
The legal notice is fine but doesn’t help outside the jurisdiction of your local legal system.
Anyway, that’s my IT perspective.
kimon;90896 wrote:
Speaking as the resident IT guy a couple of comments:
1. Trackers such as Google Analytics and the like are great but, not fool proof. For example, all my computers (work & home) are configured to not leave any tracks whatsoever with those services. As far as they’re concerned, I’m a ghost. (Yes, there are the web server logs but the majority out there do shared hosting)
2. Stuff like trying to prevent right clicking on a page does not work. you can see for yourself if you are using Firefox or Chrome as your browser by just keeping the CTRL key pressed when right clicking.
3. The above, if it does cause a problem, it will only be to the first one that copies it and you can only complain about them and nobody else. For example, if X copies the image and puts it on his website, then Y comes along and copies from there and puts on their website and finally Z does the same from Y, where does that leave you?
My recommendation for those that want to protect images is simply to add a watermark. It only takes a few seconds to add to an image or, if you want to get fancy, have a simple script that does it for you automatically for any image served by the website (for those technically minded, this can easily be done in the .htaccess file).
The legal notice is fine but doesn’t help outside the jurisdiction of your local legal system.
Anyway, that’s my IT perspective.
Statcounter is a good tracker. We are even able to pick up Kimon’s ip. I’ve never liked watermarks but Kimon is right Coach. We are going to add them to all images going forward.
Andrew Stewart Jamieson;90897 wrote:
Statcounter is a good tracker. We are even able to pick up Kimon’s ip.
Nope 
Unless you are referring to before I set up my computer to do this.
StatCounter uses the following snippet and my browsers are configured to not execute this.
<!—Start of StatCounter Code for Default Guide—>
<script type="text/javascript">
var sc_project=XXXXXX;
var sc_invisible=1;
var sc_security="YYYYYYY";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script>
<noscript><div class="statcounter"><a title="free hit counters" href="http://statcounter.com/" target="_blank"><img class="statcounter" src="http://c.statcounter.com/7057565/0/d77ba80a/1/" alt="free hit counters"></a></div></noscript>
<!—End of StatCounter Code for Default Guide—>
<!—Start of StatCounter Code for Default Guide—>
<script type="text/javascript">
var sc_project=XXXXXX;
var sc_invisible=1;
var sc_security="YYYYYYY";
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script>
<noscript><div class="statcounter"><a title="free hit counters" href="http://statcounter.com/" target="_blank"><img class="statcounter" src="http://c.statcounter.com/7057565/0/d77ba80a/1/" alt="free hit counters"></a></div></noscript>
<!—End of StatCounter Code for Default Guide—>
Yes, but will you please take the code down. I don’t want any crazies out there to learn from a computer genius how to block their ips. Thanks mate.
Andrew Stewart Jamieson;90900 wrote:
Yes, but will you please take the code down. I don’t want any crazies out there to learn from a computer genius how to block their ips. Thanks mate.
1. No, I will not
2. I have not posted any "secret" information that cannot be found with a simple Google search
3. The snippet above is not the workaround but what the statcounter is.
kimon;90901 wrote:
1. No, I will not
2. I have not posted any "secret" information that cannot be found with a simple Google search
3. The snippet above is not the workaround but what the statcounter is.
Okay fine. No problem. Thank you!
Kimon, first thanks for the IT perspective. Appreciate it. Gives me some ideas…now I have to learn how to put a watermark on my images, though, I thought I remembered from before here on AHS that whatever is posted AHS will work with those people to help protect their images. If things have changed I’d like to know immediately so I can remove what I have shared.
Second, I will use any/all legal remedies I can when I find someone using my images without my permission. Be that in my country or not. Although it will not help with people living, say, in a country in utter disarray, say, like Egypt or Libya or Syria where they have more important things to worry about.
Third…why on earth wouldn’t you take that down as per Andy’s request given the actions of a certain person who visits here including putting viruses on her blog that I later learned my own PC, or virus protection software ... whichever blocks that, blocked after I made the visit to the blog and given her past activities?!
Frankly, I take the placing of a virus on a blog and then directing people to it to be a serious offense to me personally as that is my PC, or actually a relatives while my own was being worked on, that has just been tried to be used to do something unethical/illegal. I can’t imagine that AHS would condone that action on that person’s part, nor allow to happen without at least removing the link and certainly not sharing with her how to avoid detection for her unethical, criminal activities!!!
You’re a better man that that, Kimon, please reconsider and remove your post showing her how to do that and please remove her link to the blog so no one else unsuspectedly gets a little "gift" for their trouble in viewing a blog.
Donnchadh;90908 wrote:
Third…why on earth wouldn’t you take that down as per Andy’s request given the actions of a certain person who visits here including putting viruses on her blog that my own PC blocked after I made the visit to the blog and given her past activities?!
Frankly, I take the placing of a virus on a blog and then directing people to it to be a serious offense to me personally as that is my PC, or actually a relatives while my own was being worked on, that has just been tried to be used to do something unethical/illegal.
You’re a better man that that, Kimon, please reconsider and take it down.
Denny, I like you but sometimes you have no clue what you’re talking about.
Please take this to PM or email if you want to continue.
Ok…from another IT guy. The code posted above has nothing to do with blocking anything from anyone or any service. The code snip above is simply the code used by statcounter to do what it does. There is no mention in any post by Kimon or anyone else of how to block the statcounter code that is listed.
Anyone taking 4 seconds on google or any other search engine can find what is above, but again…it does not show or say how to block it. Those of us that know how to block it do…those that don’t….don’t.
There is absolutely no reason to remove the above code snip as it doesn’t tell anything or give away any secrets. The snip above cannot enable anyone to do anything. Well maybe it can help someone get statcounter working on their site.
kimon;90909 wrote:
Denny, I like you but sometimes you have no clue what you’re talking about.
Please take this to PM or email if you want to continue.
Your kindness, charity, even-handedness and friendliness is, as always, appreciated Kimon. I appreciate being informed I have "no clue" what I’m talking about in a matter of fact manner. I thank you for keeping me ever so humble and not allowing me to get a big head and act omnipotent especially in the presence of such genius where clearly someone so plain and ignorant as myself does not belong.
For the record, Kimon and Terry, I may not be as smart as either of you two in much of anything, and I certainly do not pretend to be, but I am smart enough to be able to read my Webroot report, which I did after this all came about and was able to understand simple English enough to see that on the day I clicked on that blog Webroot did block 5 malware/virus. When it tells me the threat level was moderate to high and it blocked 5 of them that day I’m smart enough to figure that maybe, just mabye, given her past actions with hiding a virus on her stuff in order to do her thing that we all know about, AHS should at the very least remove her link to that blog. Call me a crazy, ignorant man if you will. But at least even I, as stupid as I am, can figure out that that’s a good idea.
Denny,
1. You have no clue about anything related to HTML, the web, computers, etc. You yourself have said that numerous times. Shall I link to all your posts?
2. What blog are you talking about? And how is this at all relevant to the AHS?
3. What you do with your computer that ends up with malware is no business of mine or the AHS, as long as neither one is responsible or at all related to that.
As for your snarkiness, well perhaps you need more coffee or take a deep breath, whatever helps.
kimon;90913 wrote:
Denny,
1. You have no clue about anything related to HTML, the web, computers, etc. You yourself have said that numerous times. Shall I link to all your posts?
2. What blog are you talking about? And how is this at all relevant to the AHS?
3. What you do with your computer that ends up with malware is no business of mine or the AHS, as long as neither one is responsible or at all related to that.
As for your snarkiness, well perhaps you need more coffee or take a deep breath, whatever helps.
1. I know that. I was speaking to your rude, mater-of-fact manner in what you said. But, if posting links to that makes you happy by all means do so.
2. The link in the foreign thread section. And as it’s in the foreign thread section is very much AHS business because AHS members and guests click on it and get the "gift" that is there.
3. It is responsible only in as much as it allows the link to stay up where members and guests can click on it and hope they have protection, as I was thankful I did.
4. My snarkiness is only on par with yours and after you sent the first shot of snarkiness, so perhaps you need more coffee or to take a deep breath or whatever helps.
Donnchadh;90914 wrote:
2. The link in the foreign thread section. And as it’s in the foreign thread section is very much AHS business because AHS members and guests click on it and get the "gift" that is there.
What are you talking about?
The link to the blog that’s in this thread: http://www.americanheraldry.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6370
Now, in between visits to clients homes and classes at the school where I was teaching art I would hit the WWW. However, and perhaps it’s dangerous saying this, but I only go to certain places and I am OCD (not really) enough to go in this manner: email in my yahoo account, FB, AHS, and the other heraldry place. I run a scan before I log on to the WWW and again when I’m done. And since I never get the ‘Webroot blocked…’ while visiting those places, it can only be the place I went that one day, which was that blog. Now, is that proof? I don’t know. But, I know of at least one other member/guest here had stuff blocked as well. To me, well, where there’s smoke there’s fire. This is why I’m saying this.