Image downloading query

The place to discuss anything to do with computers, software, hardware, no matter how basic or technical. We all use this stuff, but we don't always understand it!
User avatar
Mountain Goat
Posts: 6070
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Leysin, Alpes Vaudoises, Switzerland
Contact:

Image downloading query

Post by Mountain Goat »

I need to use some images from an excellent local village website (meteological fanatic), but can't download either thumbnails nor full-size via right-clicking. They appear to be part of a Mac-based slideshow.

Anyone got any ideas? Here's a sample.

They're free of copyright BTW, although linking to his site is requested - generous guy.

He links to some fabulous pics. of Chamonix here - his own album is vast and sorted chronologically through the seasons.

MG
User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:41 am
Location: Charente Maritime

Post by Jimbo »

I need to use some images from an excellent local village website (meteological fanatic), but can't download either thumbnails nor full-size ...
I accept that there are no copyright issues with this particular website but I'd strongly recommend that anybody who knows how to do this should contact MG privately. Please don't post information that may lead to copyright abuse on other websites on an open forum.

MG, why not contact the guy directly, ask for pictures and build a relationship with him. He'd probably be delighted and flattered with your interest in his work.

Jim
User avatar
Mountain Goat
Posts: 6070
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Leysin, Alpes Vaudoises, Switzerland
Contact:

Post by Mountain Goat »

Jim I take your point.

Actually, I am in contact with him, but his patience may be wearing a bit thin - he has many images that we've used.

It's not just this site, so it's the technique I need to learn - I've never had any problem before - PMs are welcome, or maybe this procedure should be hidden in Members Only?

Interestingly, our village invites downloading images on one of its sites (see Presse), they make excellent publicity material (yes, I've asked them, and yes, I know the photographer, and they're as keen to publicise our village as myself)

MG
User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:41 am
Location: Charente Maritime

Post by Jimbo »

MG, I'm not having a pop at you because I know that you're a principled goat. Sadly, others are not so righteous.

Jim
User avatar
Mountain Goat
Posts: 6070
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Leysin, Alpes Vaudoises, Switzerland
Contact:

Post by Mountain Goat »

Please don't post information that may lead to copyright abuse on other websites on an open forum.

Jimbo

This one's been nagging in the back of my mind. Surely it's a bit much to be dissuaded from a legal action because another person might act illegally?

It should be our duty to educate them into not acting illegally.

Not teaching kids chemistry and physics - they might build a bomb?

Not explaining how to use email - they might become a spammer?

Not teaching someone to use a camera properly - they might start filming porn?

Not teaching someone to drive - they might become a hit-and-run driver?

Einstein censored because his research might lead to 'the' bomb?

No - can't agree on that one. I know it's your Achilles heel, but better to explain (as you have done thoroughly elsewhere) why copyright shouldn't be infringed.

MG
User avatar
Alan Knighting
Posts: 4120
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:26 am
Location: Monflanquin, Lot-et-Garonne, France

Post by Alan Knighting »

Mountain Goat wrote:Please don't post information that may lead to copyright abuse on other websites on an open forum.

Jimbo

This one's been nagging in the back of my mind. Surely it's a bit much to be dissuaded from a legal action because another person might act illegally?

It should be our duty to educate them into not acting illegally.

Not teaching kids chemistry and physics - they might build a bomb?

Not explaining how to use email - they might become a spammer?

Not teaching someone to use a camera properly - they might start filming porn?

Not teaching someone to drive - they might become a hit-and-run driver?

Einstein censored because his research might lead to 'the' bomb?

No - can't agree on that one. I know it's your Achilles heel, but better to explain (as you have done thoroughly elsewhere) why copyright shouldn't be infringed.

MG
Unless you are trying to be funny that’s just patronising nonsense. You might as well say “don’t teach children to speak; if you do they might say something of which you don’t approve”.

Alan
User avatar
Mountain Goat
Posts: 6070
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Leysin, Alpes Vaudoises, Switzerland
Contact:

Post by Mountain Goat »

Alan, a slight miracle, but I couldn't agree with you more: the gift of language bears with it the responsibility of use or abuse.

It's provided us with Shakespeare and Mein Kamf.

There is no knowledge that cannot be abused.

MG
User avatar
Alan Knighting
Posts: 4120
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:26 am
Location: Monflanquin, Lot-et-Garonne, France

Post by Alan Knighting »

Mountain Goat wrote:Alan, a slight miracle, but I couldn't agree with you more: the gift of language bears with it the responsibility of use or abuse.

It's provided us with Shakespeare and Mein Kamf.

There is no knowledge that cannot be abused.

MG
It’s no miracle. Both you and I love using the language we were gifted with.

Alan
A-two
Posts: 2091
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 10:05 am
Location: USA

Post by A-two »

MG,
Snagit.com will take care of this. I would give the guy a photo credit on principle, whether he asks for it or not.
User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:41 am
Location: Charente Maritime

Post by Jimbo »

Surely it's a bit much to be dissuaded from a legal action because another person might act illegally?
MG, that’s an interesting take on your responsibility to your fellow citizen. Your absolute right to put potentially harmful information into the public domain. 'Nothing to do with me guv' is a weasel phrase that has echoed through history.

Suppose you want an explosive device to remove a WW2 bunker from your garden. It’s your private land, nobody within miles and you’ll make sure that H+S procedures are followed so nobody gets hurt. You ask for instructions to make your bomb on a public internet forum (Destroy My Hat?). These are provided, you make your bomb and have great fun blowing-up your bunker – job done. Unfortunately, a low-life googles ‘bomb making’ and finds your posts. He makes a similar bomb, uses it to rob his local post office and several people are killed in the process. Not your fault or your responsibility – right? Even though you could have taken the simple precaution of requesting that your information was posted privately.
I know it's your Achilles heel …
I understand an ‘Achilles heel’ to mean a ‘fatal weakness leading to downfall’, which is an odd way to describe my regular postings against copyright abusers on this forum. In common with fellow photographers, artists, writers and many others, I have a moral and legal right to protect my creative output from theft. I’d hoped that my anti copyright abuse postings on this forum might have had an effect but I've come to understand that I’m whistling in the wind.
Snagit.com will take care of this.
Amazing A2. A few months back, you were banging on about copyright abuse of your website. Now you've given everybody the tools to do the job.

Jim
User avatar
meerkat
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Droitwich, Worcestershire

Post by meerkat »

I think we probably agree on most points, and I certainly approve wholeheartedly of copyright.

I think however we just need to untangle the issues involved, most importantly the difference between knowledge and the use of knowledge:

1. I assume we agree that we cannot, and would not want to, inhibit the frontiers of knowledge.

2. I also think we agree that all knowledge is open to abuse and misuse.

3. Because this is the case, we also agree on the need to limit abuse, and this give us two choices: firstly, we can go down the dangerous route of someone (but who?) deciding who should have access to knowledge and who should not. This means censorship and the end of freedom of speech - i.e. democracy in danger; secondly, we can try to educate people to use knowledge in an ethical fashion.

I endorse the second option, both philosophically and pragmatically. Philosophically, I prefer to take the risk that knowledge can, and will be, misused than to compromise the principals of democracy, and pragmatically I believe that people who want access to knowledge, for whatever reason, will find it. You may differ at this point, and I can understand this. But how lucky we are to have the right to this sort of discourse!

Meerkat
User avatar
Mountain Goat
Posts: 6070
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:31 pm
Location: Leysin, Alpes Vaudoises, Switzerland
Contact:

Post by Mountain Goat »

Um, well, welcome, Meerkat - so in a nutshell I can get on with my legal downloading without fear of being swatted by an irate tripod?

Thanks, A2 - much appreciated. I'm actually using 3 screensavers at the moment (and have been for years), all with glitches, so this one's very welcome and appears to be a cut above the rest.

MG
User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:41 am
Location: Charente Maritime

Post by Jimbo »

Meerkat, welcome to the forum.

I’m having a final attempt to simplify the copyright issue - but I’m not really sure why I’m bothering. It’s obvious to me that copyright abuse is not an interesting or relevant issue for most (if not all) on this forum. Last post.

I’ve discovered that burglars have regularly been breaking into my house and stealing from my wallet. Making it worse is the knowledge that a couple of my neighbours (for reasons that are not clear) are aiding the criminals with information about how best to carry out these felonies. Many of the burglars come from countries where the legal system is a dog’s dinner, so it’s difficult, time-consuming and costly to recover my money. Intriguingly, like me, my neighbours belong to an internet forum for rental owners where they regularly discuss items such as guests trashing their properties. Unlike their unconcerned attitude to my wallet thefts, in these circumstances the talk is not about ‘freedom’ and ‘education’ but security deposits, angry exchanges with erring guests and withholding money. In the past 21 months, I’ve been regularly discussing the problem of ‘wallet thefts’ with my neighbours – trying to ‘educate’ them – but, like I said before, whistling in the wind.

How many thefts will it take before my wallet is finally emptied and will my neighbours feel justified that their fanciful and selective notions of information, freedom and education have helped me to descend into bankruptcy?

Jim
User avatar
meerkat
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:53 pm
Location: Droitwich, Worcestershire

Post by meerkat »

Jim, many thanks for your welcome.

I think we all agree that copyright is important, relevant and necessary.

Re the knowledge question, I think we need to differentiate between personal information, such as bank and security details, and knowledge. The former is private, the latter - by virtue of the word knowledge - implies relevance within the public domain.

Meerkat
A-two
Posts: 2091
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 10:05 am
Location: USA

Post by A-two »

Jimbo wrote:
A2. A few months back, you were banging on about copyright abuse of your website. Now you've given everybody the tools to do the job.
Jim,
Actually, I have tightened up on photo copyright a lot in the past few months since that discussion, including disabling right click on my own site. I am also working now with a professional photographer on a charity website and she makes you look like a puppy dog when it comes to defending copyright and use of her donated photos. However, I do not support your attempts to censor a valid discussion about how to copy photos legally, and Snagit is perfectly legal software with many useful functions that I would like to share.

If you want to improve the copyright situation, instead of beating me up, I think your efforts might go further if you and other professional photographers tried to persuade the folks over at Digimark, who offer invisible and trackable copyright marks, to offer that service at a rate I can actually afford, instead of the ludicrously high $500 for 10,000 images, which caters only to a small subset of those whose works are impacted.
Post Reply