Copywright and watermarking methods (Digimarc)
Jan 30, 2014 14:01:34 #
With all the activity on photo theft lately, has anyone used or considered an embeded watermarking method, like digimarc?
If you have, does it work well? Does it distort the images? Do you like it?
Up until now, I had considered it overkill. But now???
If you have, does it work well? Does it distort the images? Do you like it?
Up until now, I had considered it overkill. But now???
Jan 30, 2014 22:48:29 #
Digimarc is an Invisible watermarking method ie:you want see the watermark.I don't think that is good way to protect images since potential thief's wont recognize the image copyrighted.Unlike this a visible watermark can deter theft and provide online popularity.
What i do is watermark,resize and add exif to my photos before uplaoding them online.This tool named Mass Watermark allows me to do that simultaneously http://masswatermark.com take a look
What i do is watermark,resize and add exif to my photos before uplaoding them online.This tool named Mass Watermark allows me to do that simultaneously http://masswatermark.com take a look
Jan 31, 2014 05:47:23 #
Jan 31, 2014 08:08:37 #
rainbow9 wrote:
Digimarc is an Invisible watermarking method ie:you want see the watermark.I don't think that is good way to protect images since potential thief's wont recognize the image copyrighted.Unlike this a visible watermark can deter theft and provide online popularity.
What i do is watermark,resize and add exif to my photos before uplaoding them online.This tool named Mass Watermark allows me to do that simultaneously http://masswatermark.com take a look
What i do is watermark,resize and add exif to my photos before uplaoding them online.This tool named Mass Watermark allows me to do that simultaneously http://masswatermark.com take a look
But with digimark, you can find that image anywhere onthe internet. With a visible watermark, you either render the image unuseable or place it so it can be croped out. I think Digimark and visible watermarks serve different purposes and you can do both.
Jan 31, 2014 10:20:51 #
Visible watermark and you can do it effortlessly with LR, PS, as well as many other programs.
Here are some realities to keep in mind regarding Copyright and watermarks:
1) If you put your images out in the digital word, it's not a matter of "if" the images get stolen; it's a matter of when, because they will.
2) So what can you do to protect your property? Well first and foremost, you register your Copyright. This gives you really the only legal power you can have to force somebody to cease using your work, including statutory damages. Adding a watermark on anything you release into the digital world provides a few extra benefits. One being that it is a Federal Crime to actually crop out or remove somebody's digital management, i.e. watermark. There are separate statutory damages for doing that as well, plus it strengthens your case in proving intent in any infringement litigation you may pursue. However, in my opinion, the watermark really serves another very important benefit. It is free advertising for your work. If somebody is going to use/repost your work anyway, doesn't it make sense to try and get at least some benefit out of it? Why not plant a marketing/sales tool in it by providing a way for those seeing it, and who become interested, to be able to find you and more of your product? After all, the infringer will no doubt be exposing your product to an audience outside of your regular channels.
2) So the next question is, what are you going to do when your work is stolen? Will you just send a DMCA takedown notice? Will you send them a bill? Will you threaten to sue them? Will you actually sue them? You really need to evaluate just what the actual cost to you is and what you really want to accomplish. I would argue that, if they are using it commercially, they should pay you(if this was the case, and having a registered copyright, I would just send them a fairly priced bill for their use, letting them know that I'm happy they like my work, and offer a fair price for continued use if they would like, and let them know, in a businesslike manner that they currently are infringing your registered work, in other words, provide them an easy and quick way to resolve the situation to the benefit of both parties, and maybe even a lead to more work), but if they are just posting it to be seen, maybe it's not such a bad thing either and the better action would be for you to get them to keep the work there, but provide a link to your site. Every instance will surely be different; it might actually present a great business opportunity instead of a bloody expensive fight. Besides, to actually take them to court, you're going to need your Copyright to be registered (it really gives you the only big club you can have to get them to comply), you're going to need a good chunk of money for the litigation, you're going to need to have some time to pursue, we are talking year+. You also need to be a gambler to some extent since anything can happen once a case goes to trial, and even with everything in your favor, you can still lose for a multitude of reasons, and that can really get expensive, both mentally and financially.
3) So with the above in mind, make your watermark unique and easy to identify. Make it so they can find you and/or your site. But make it so it doesn't destroy/obscure the beauty of the work, after all, you made it for people to admire, let them.
Here are some realities to keep in mind regarding Copyright and watermarks:
1) If you put your images out in the digital word, it's not a matter of "if" the images get stolen; it's a matter of when, because they will.
2) So what can you do to protect your property? Well first and foremost, you register your Copyright. This gives you really the only legal power you can have to force somebody to cease using your work, including statutory damages. Adding a watermark on anything you release into the digital world provides a few extra benefits. One being that it is a Federal Crime to actually crop out or remove somebody's digital management, i.e. watermark. There are separate statutory damages for doing that as well, plus it strengthens your case in proving intent in any infringement litigation you may pursue. However, in my opinion, the watermark really serves another very important benefit. It is free advertising for your work. If somebody is going to use/repost your work anyway, doesn't it make sense to try and get at least some benefit out of it? Why not plant a marketing/sales tool in it by providing a way for those seeing it, and who become interested, to be able to find you and more of your product? After all, the infringer will no doubt be exposing your product to an audience outside of your regular channels.
2) So the next question is, what are you going to do when your work is stolen? Will you just send a DMCA takedown notice? Will you send them a bill? Will you threaten to sue them? Will you actually sue them? You really need to evaluate just what the actual cost to you is and what you really want to accomplish. I would argue that, if they are using it commercially, they should pay you(if this was the case, and having a registered copyright, I would just send them a fairly priced bill for their use, letting them know that I'm happy they like my work, and offer a fair price for continued use if they would like, and let them know, in a businesslike manner that they currently are infringing your registered work, in other words, provide them an easy and quick way to resolve the situation to the benefit of both parties, and maybe even a lead to more work), but if they are just posting it to be seen, maybe it's not such a bad thing either and the better action would be for you to get them to keep the work there, but provide a link to your site. Every instance will surely be different; it might actually present a great business opportunity instead of a bloody expensive fight. Besides, to actually take them to court, you're going to need your Copyright to be registered (it really gives you the only big club you can have to get them to comply), you're going to need a good chunk of money for the litigation, you're going to need to have some time to pursue, we are talking year+. You also need to be a gambler to some extent since anything can happen once a case goes to trial, and even with everything in your favor, you can still lose for a multitude of reasons, and that can really get expensive, both mentally and financially.
3) So with the above in mind, make your watermark unique and easy to identify. Make it so they can find you and/or your site. But make it so it doesn't destroy/obscure the beauty of the work, after all, you made it for people to admire, let them.
Jan 31, 2014 10:56:32 #
I understand how to do a visible watermark. The question is about anyone's experience with the invisible trackable watermark methods (like Digimarc)
Jan 31, 2014 15:14:00 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
Ahhh, to have one of my photos stolen and used! What a compliment!
I did not take it to make money off of it but to have someone enjoy it. Now many can and at no cost to me!
All this silliness about copyright and watermark! Why?
I did not take it to make money off of it but to have someone enjoy it. Now many can and at no cost to me!
All this silliness about copyright and watermark! Why?
Jan 31, 2014 15:51:13 #
dsmeltz wrote:
I understand how to do a visible watermark. The question is about anyone's experience with the invisible trackable watermark methods (like Digimarc)
From Digimarc's website:
Please note that password-protected sites, web pages behind firewalls, Flash-based galleries and database-driven websites are not open for any spider to crawl, including Digimarc's. This includes popular photo-sharing portals such as Picasa, Flickr and SmugMug, as well as social networking sites such as Facebook.
What that says to me, is that it's practically worthless in the current environment.
And if THEY can't look inside these places, how does Google?
Jan 31, 2014 16:29:48 #
Wall-E wrote:
And if THEY can't look inside these places, how does Google?
I imagine Google make special arrangements with those sites for a "backdoor" which Google can use to scan them. They're willing to make such deals, because what site doesn't want to be included in a Google search?
Digimarc on the other hand, is a much smaller company, and only offers those sites the chance to have their customers harassed with take-down notices.
Feb 1, 2014 15:42:32 #
Ole Sarge....What if...IF...You got an incredible photo of whatever...and you post it on wherever.....someone steals the ART from you and posts it somewhere else and takes credit for it (and possible job opportunities and or cash!) If that doesn't bother you please send me all your photos before you publish them online so I can filter which ones I would like to take credit for. Your pictures are YOUR way to show HOW you see things. You should get credit (and financial gains) from your work.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.