View Full Version : Image protection

02-12-2008, 03:10 PM

I inserted <body oncontextmenu="return false;"> right after <body> on my index.html page and it worked great - no right-clicking allowed on the images on that page.

But when I tried to put it into the template for my website and inserted it after <body> and before <div class="style1" id="wrapper">, I got an "Invalid Markup" message - doesn't belong inside the tag it's in.

So then I tried this:

body {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
text-align: center;
background: url(../bluebgedit.jpg);
body oncontextmenu=return false;

but that didn't work, either. Is there a way
to insert this in to my template page so that all of my webpages will have this code included? If not, can I manually put it into each one of the pages, where the coding begins for the editable regions?

Thanks. :)

02-12-2008, 03:27 PM
your wasting your time with this

once a user is viewing the image its already on their machine so they could just dive into their cache and retrieve the images

you putting yourself though hassle for nothing

also i get extremely p****d off when some one takes away functionality which i use often normally expressing my disappointment by never returning.

never put anything on a web site that you don't want all to have access to (with or without a payment gateway)

while we are on the subject a reputable site actually put a history hack on one of their sites which stopped me going back to my google results page. Well it stopped me for 0.5 of a second. This infuriates me.

02-12-2008, 03:44 PM
I'm only trying to prevent people from taking photographs I've taken and using them without permission. I don't think that's unreasonable.

There are people who, while perfectly fine with me posting pictures of them on my website so that others can see them, don't necessarily want other people to take those pictures and do who knows what with them. So I thought this would be a relatively simple way to at least try to discourage people from taking images that don't belong to them.

I realize that there's no way to keep someone from taking pictures off a webpage if they're determined to do so, but there are a lot of people who don't know about cache or go beyond right-clicking on an image to save it.

Thanks for your input.

02-12-2008, 03:49 PM
Best way to make sure your visitors never comes back => Decrease the functionality of the website for no apparent reason.

The right click menu is customizable, and many people have a lot of important or much used things in there.

As far as your problem goes, you cannot copy and paste JS into your CSS.

d a v e
02-12-2008, 03:50 PM
the only people who don't know how to use 'print screen' or screen-grab software, or see their cache, or disable javascript and use their right mouse button probably know how to use google/msn/yahoo and search for it... :)

it's just not worth it. all you can do is make the images too small to be useful or then watermark them with text/logo/both.
of course it's not unreasonable to not want your pictures saved or messed about with, but disabling right-click is a drop in the ocean as far as prevntion goes, but it's damn annoying to everyone else who wants to use their right mouse button! :)

02-12-2008, 04:03 PM
Actually, if it is sensitive images, you shouldn't post them on the web at all. The image has to be downloaded to the visitors machine in order to be viewed on their monitor.

02-12-2008, 04:34 PM
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, now I see what you mean about taking away all of the functionality of right-click, and I've restored it to my index page.

Maybe the watermark is the way to go - something that won't impede viewing, but might discourage the average person from taking the picture?

If I were to use the transparent gif method over the few pictures I have on my pages (using the watermark for galleries that are going up), do you think that's something that would come across as unfriendly to the viewer?

It's not that the images are sensitive. I only use pics that people have given me approval to use. But I understand their desire not to have them used in other places and by other people without their approval.

Thanks again for the insight.

02-12-2008, 04:51 PM
I worked some on a mayor real estate website, and what we did was watermark the images, not through a transparent gif, but actually imposed the image directly on the images customers of the website would upload to make new images with the watermark on.

This was made mainly because other real estate websites would try to copy and paste all our info in order to get their DB built up. The watermark was a good stopper for that.

Another project I've been involved in was for a successful professional photographer. He wanted to display his photos very large, but was also concerned about people copying and using his photos. He did not want to clutter his beautiful photography, so he took the good with the bad and put his photos in his online gallery. His solution was to send an email to anyone using his photos, and then let a lawyer take over if that didn't work. If I remember right, copyright infringements are a federal offense in the US.

What is your scenario speedyalice?

02-12-2008, 05:04 PM
The pictures I have on my website are of people participating in various dressage clinics and also of the Spanish Riding School (which is very particular about photos on the Internet). It's not as if there are thousands of people who are waiting to take these pics. :) But I would like to protect the unauthorized use of the photos, if possible.

Thanks for the information about the watermarks. That might be the best way to go.

02-12-2008, 05:18 PM
Was this the monthly post on image protection? I'm not to late am I?

Speedyalice - seriously, like Dom and DJ said if it is that important don't put it on the web. There is always a way to get the images, unless you put a big ugly watermark over the whole thing, but even then your not full protected because that could be removed if someone wanted to take the time. And there are people out there who will take the time.

There was a hacker who used to hack site and put a picture of a volcano and the home page of ever site he hacked. His reason for doing this was.."Because I could."

Perfect example.

d a v e
02-12-2008, 06:56 PM
if the pics are really sensitive then you could consider password restricted access to some of them???

02-12-2008, 07:00 PM
I'm intrigued

what are these images of?

02-12-2008, 07:53 PM
I think everyone has gone through this process at some point just to be told its a waste of time and annoying to users. I know I did.

I think Watermarks can look OK though in some circumstances, if I go on a stock photography website for instance I expect to see them and I think they can be made to look OK.

Check out http://www.istockphoto.com/ their watermarks look OK I think.


02-12-2008, 07:53 PM
what are these images of?

02-12-2008, 07:58 PM
Ya, you should be fine with the watermark.

Ricky55 - I agree.

02-12-2008, 11:17 PM
Thanks for the comments.

Really, it's not that the pictures are sensitive or really great or that a lot of people would even want them. My website is for a pretty small segment of the population. I tried to put the website in my signature before, but it didn't show up. I see it's there now, though. So far there are very few pictures on it... I'm hoping to get galleries up in the next few days.

It's mostly that I don't want the riders in my clinics to find pictures of themselves in other unexpected places (other websites or being critiqued/criticized on horse forums, etc) after they're nice enough to let me put them on the website. I've had pictures and (even an article once) lifted and used by others as if it's their own work, which is amazing to me.

At the risk of generalizing too much, many (I'd venture to say the majority) of the people who do dressage tend not to be really computer-literate. Look at it this way... people in dressage circles think I know a lot about computers/web stuff, which is a joke. :) Compared to many of them, though, yes, I do - which gives you an idea...:) When I say most people who come to my website wouldn't go beyond right-clicking to save an image, I am sincere.

Anyway, since I haven't customized my right-click button, it didn't occur to me that disabling that function on my website would be a PITA for people, so I'm really glad I learned that before I used it.

Maybe putting a trademark thing on the bottom, the way professionals do (I'm not a professional photographer!), would at least ID those pics that do get taken. And if someone takes the time to Photoshop it out, well... so be it.

In a way it's a bit of a relief to know that there's no point in spending extra hours trying to protect images. I won't feel so much like a slacker when I just stick 'em online. :)

Thank you again - this has been enlightening.

02-13-2008, 03:30 PM
Maybe putting a trademark thing on the bottom, the way professionals do (I'm not a professional photographer!), would at least ID those pics that do get taken. And if someone takes the time to Photoshop it out, well... so be it. Someone will have copyright of the photos, you or your 'members', automatically. You never have to file for it, it comes automatically when it's created. Adding a copyright notice on the bottom of the website is always good practice, and you can even put a little copyright notice under other peoples photos if you want to. If someone has a photo of yours on your website, you can email them about taking it down. If they don't comply, you can find their hosts reporting system for these kind of things, and usually the hosting company will take care of it for you.