Quote:
Originally Posted by brian.austin
Exactly. In fact, images wandering through MySpace or wherever would have considerably LESS value due to their widespread publication in an uncontrolled environment.
|
Really? Is there some magic picture registration fairy that tracks this sort of thing? Tracks the number of views and tells everyone how badly you're getting screwed by having an image on some emo kid's website visited only by his 5 glue sniffing cutter friends?
If you think that 400x250 pixel images are somehow hurting your picture's value and your pocketbook, you need to wake up to reality. Your work, while it may be good, is not that good.
Besides... if someone is using your image on myspace or whatever, it's trivial to get it taken down. Send a DMCA takedown request to myspace or imageshack and it will be down in 24 hours. Incredibly simple, no debate, no BS and the infringer's site / portion of the site will probably get killed. You're also more than welcome to track the person down and file a suit in federal court against a 12 year old, but most people don't go that route because a.) it would make them look like jerks, b.) it's financially stupid to pay a lawyer money to sue a 12 year old and c.) good luck collecting on your 'win'.
In cases of willful infringement of high res images in a commercial setting by an entity with actual assets, you often end up with people who fight you and make you sue or at least hire a lawyer to get a decent settlement. Very rarely will someone come forth and say "whoops, we screwed up and would like to make it right."
Pretty sure you want to CYA for the latter case, but then again, what do I know. My farts don't smell like roses.