Pictures used on other sites

[Mr Creosote]

Just wondered if a general policy about whether other sites are allowed to take screenshots and scans exists on HOL. The reason I'm asking is I've stumbled across this and if one looks at the 'folds' on the box, it's obviously the same one I scanned for HOL. Now, on that other site, it's credited to some guy who didn't do anything but save my scans from HOL and submit them there, they're miscategorized as 'DOS release' and they have been 'branded' with that site's logo. I wouldn't have minded if anyone had asked and if proper credit to HOL (or me for that instance) had been given, but this way, it's just lame. So... what's the HOL people's opionion?

[CodyJarrett]

Thanks for pointing it out. It has happened before with MobyGames, with a larger number of scans, but the admin there will remove the images if asked and, to be fair, they probably receive a large number of contributions. I'll contact them about this one.

I don't think that it's a problem where a few HOL files (usually screenshots) have been used on non-database sites. There are a number of sites that use them in this minor way.

It is a problem where sites with the same goal as the HOL include its scans and screenshots. This has happened a lot in the past with database sites. Usually an email to the admin sorts it out with at the very least a note about where the images come from. Other times it becomes something of a battle. It's not very fair on the HOL contributors and team who have spent money and time to buy games and run the site, especially when someone else is reaping financial benefit.

We've also had screenshots appear in magazines such as Edge, GamesTM and RetroGamer with only Edge asking beforehand and including a credit. Then there was the guy who accused the HOL team of being "thieves" and was offering the site as a download...

So it's happened before and will happen again.

[Mr Creosote]

Just for the record: I'm perfectly aware that the Mobygames admins can't be held responsible themselves. I've talked to Jim often enough to know he cares and wants to do the right thing. My guess is that Mobygames itself is the biggest victim of all gaming sites of lame actions like that. Back when I was still running these rings and linkpages, sites which ripped off Mobygames popped up there every day.

So it's happened before and will happen again.

Which is totally frustrating At the moment, I'm scanning a whole new batch of manuals for my site and for the first time I'm seriously contemplating to put some kind of 'watermark' image on them. This is something I've never done before, because they're not my own creation. I'm also sharing lots of my stuff with other sites like HOL and yet I'm still ripped off all the time by kids who think it's a great idea to assemble all the contents for their own sites from other sites without the slightest contribution by themselves! Gah, this really pisses me off. Before I'm beginning to rant even more, I'll just cut it short here. Just one conclusion: Those people stealing other people's contents are responsible for preservation working less and less well because they're practically forcing the actual collectors to 'protect' their contents.

[z00mba]

I'm really wondering what the hell are you talking about?

You are talking about preservation and you want to put a watermark on the scans to protect "your" work. It's not even your work, it's the original creators and publishers' work, you won't do anything more than scanning and put it online.

If you think this make the original work yours, then there is a serious problem.

[Magno Boots]

I would be happy to see one of my scans appear on another site..

One of my rare LCD handhelds is featured on a website and I'm just happy that its there, and it belongs to me.

[CodyJarrett]

Originally Posted by z00mba

If you think this make the original work yours, then there is a serious problem.

Mr. C said no such thing. He specifically said "they're not my own creation".

The meaning of 'content' is the hard work putting together a website. And by protecting it all you're doing is trying to stop others take this work, claim it as their own and make money out of it.

Originally Posted by z00mba

you won't do anything more than scanning and put it online.

This makes it all sound rather simple. In fact, it isn't. Rare games don't grow on trees, eBay isn't a charity, scanning hundreds of boxes doesn't take 30 seconds, websites don't build themselves and hosting isn't free.

What I find amazing is the the developers of these games are almost always happy to see their creations live on in this way. The people who have a problem with it are inevitably those that weren't involved with the games at all!

Furthermore, what's the point in spending the time and money to put together a resource for the community if someone else is going to take your effort and claim it as their own?

[z00mba]

Originally Posted by Magno Boots

I would be happy to see one of my scans appear on another site..

One of my rare LCD handhelds is featured on a website and I'm just happy that its there, and it belongs to me.

I tought it's the purpose...

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

The meaning of 'content' is the hard work putting together a website. And by protecting it all you're doing is trying to stop others take this work, claim it as their own and make money out of it.

There is a very easy way to protect your site content: don't put it online.

Protecting a personal creation is one thing, protecting someone's else creation is a very different (and pointless) thing.

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

This makes it all sound rather simple. In fact, it isn't. Rare games don't grow on trees, eBay isn't a charity, scanning hundreds of boxes doesn't take 30 seconds, websites don't build themselves and hosting isn't free.

Well I'm producing sites for a living so I guess I know how it's going there...

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

What I find amazing is the the developers of these games are almost always happy to see their creations live on in this way. The people who have a problem with it are inevitably those that weren't involved with the games at all!

And when it's the case they are probably more happy when their creation is respected and freely avaible to everyone than when someone put a damn watermark on it or when it tag a floppy disk image...

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

Furthermore, what's the point in spending the time and money to put together a resource for the community if someone else is going to take your effort and claim it as their own?

It's, of course, lame, but it goes like that and until you are the legal owner of the copyright there is nothing you can do about it, except like I said, don't put it online. Now putting a watermark is as lame as picking up ressource from another site.

Now, most of those sites who steal ressources from other or craps and/or die quicly. My opinion is there is no real point to worry about these persons, just concentrate on what you do and peoples will recognizes your effort (and if some don't, they are probably of no interest).

[CodyJarrett]

Originally Posted by z00mba

There is a very easy way to protect your site content: don't put it online.

This isn't a very constructive comment! There needs to be a common sense approach to balancing the sharing of knowledge with protecting a site's content.

Originally Posted by z00mba

Protecting a personal creation is one thing, protecting someone's else creation is a very different (and pointless) thing.

If I create a site which is a database of games then I'm entitled to protect my own creation, which is the site HTML, code, layout, style, content and hard work.

Well I'm producing sites for a living so I guess I know how it's going there...

Then you agree that there is more to it than initially suggested...

Originally Posted by z00mba

And when it's the case they are probably more happy when their creation is respected and freely avaible to everyone than when someone put a damn watermark on it or when it tag a floppy disk image...

I don't agree with watermarking scans and screens and you won't find any watermarks in the Hall of Light. Mr. C also said that he doesn't like doing it and would only do it reluctantly. So we're mainly in agreement here!

Originally Posted by z00mba

It's, of course, lame, but it goes like that and until you are the legal owner of the copyright there is nothing you can do about it, except like I said, don't put it online. Now putting a watermark is as lame as picking up ressource from another site.

But there is actually a form of copyright protection for the creative arrangement of a site. If I grab a screenshot then the original company may hold copyright on the graphics but there is a protection for the selection of the screengrab and the arrangement on a webpage. Also, there's a Database Right to specifically protect the work involved in gathering data. It's a European Union directive which is implemented by individual countries.

[DrBong]

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

The meaning of 'content' is the hard work putting together a website. And by protecting it all you're doing is trying to stop others take this work, claim it as their own and make money out of it.

Originally Posted by z00mba

There is a very easy way to protect your site content: don't put it online.

Protecting a personal creation is one thing, protecting someone's else creation is a very different (and pointless) thing.

Read Cody's statement (quoted above) again. He was talking about protecting the fruits of the hard work put into constructing a website like HOL and NOT the graphics, scans etc. of work belonging to game publishers and development teams. It's up to game publishers and development teams to protect their own work and advise other parties where they think their intellectual property/copyright has been infringed. Using scans of game boxes, disks etc. of commercial games, however, is perfectly legitimate in the EU (and some countries elsewhere) and comes under fair use laws.

And when it's the case they are probably more happy when their creation is respected and freely avaible to everyone than when someone put a damn watermark on it or when it tag a floppy disk image...

It's, of course, lame, but it goes like that and until you are the legal owner of the copyright there is nothing you can do about it, except like I said, don't put it online. Now putting a watermark is as lame as picking up ressource from another site.

Yes, watermarks are lame and the HOL team are firmly against using them. Personally, though, I can understand sometimes when webmasters are so frustrated by having stuff ripped off by other websites without being given proper credit, that they resort to watermarking.

Ripping off massive amounts of stuff from websites is also lame. We had some clever guy do it with the whole of HOL several months ago and offer it on a torrent site. He removed most references to HOL (and may have stuck in something about himself) and when confronted about it called us a bunch of thieves given all the hard work put in over 7+ years for what is a non-commercial project (that incidentally costs RCK a lot of money in hosting along with EAB, APOV, aGTW, Classic WB etc. etc. etc.).

Now, most of those sites who steal ressources from other or craps and/or die quicly. My opinion is there is no real point to worry about these persons, just concentrate on what you do and peoples will recognizes your effort (and if some don't, they are probably of no interest).

If that was only true most of the time.......unfortunately it isn't with most serious game sites

[z00mba]

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

This isn't a very constructive comment! There needs to be a common sense approach to balancing the sharing of knowledge with protecting a site's content.

It may not sound constructive but in fact it is if you can pass thro the humor packaging. =)

What I meant is it's almost impossible to protect your site content, and this is even more true with hobbyist sites. Because you have no real legal tools in your hand for that. I can't imagine someone making a site for fun and copyrighting every single element of it. And even if you do (and it will cost you a lot of money) will you really go with a lawer against someone who'd steal your work? I really doubt it because it will cost you even more money, a lot of energy and time and sometimes it's not even possible because of laws being different from a country to another.

Originally Posted by CodyJarrett

If I create a site which is a database of games then I'm entitled to protect my own creation, which is the site HTML, code, layout, style, content and hard work.

Protecting client side elements (HTML, JS, Flash, design, visual content, textual content, etc), you can forget about it for the reasons I explained before and because there is no technical way to really protect them. The only thing you can really protect are server side elements (database and server side code).

But there is actually a form of copyright protection for the creative arrangement of a site. If I grab a screenshot then the original company may hold copyright on the graphics but there is a protection for the selection of the screengrab and the arrangement on a webpage. Also, there's a Database Right to specifically protect the work involved in gathering data. It's a European Union directive which is implemented by individual countries.

There's a huge step between the authoring rights protection on the paper and in real life for the reasons I explained before (among a few other).

[CodyJarrett]

I agree that it's hard for hobby sites to take legal action. However, it doesn't cost anything to copyright your own work. Copyright is an implied right which starts on the original date of creation. The copyright (c) notice is usually added to reinforce this.

It's not a good idea to abandon all thought of legal protection. Failing to actively protect your work can be seen as abandoning rights. As you say, lawyers are, of course, expensive and so usually unavailable to hobby sites (and will take every opportunity to screw you - as was seen in this recent UK case in a miners' claim: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...140977,00.html)

The law isn't the only way to protect sites. So it's not a case of deciding between lots of protection or no protection and a degree of reasonable protection is justifiable.

[Mr Creosote]

Cody and DrBong basically said it all. Just wanted to add that I refrained from putting anything on my latest scans, so they're all 'clean'. If anyone takes them without credit, there's nothing I can do, yes. Still doesn't make it right. In this 6.5 years I've been running my site, I've been ripped off repeatedly, mainly with the comics. In a few cases, I've even seen my 'unmarked' scans being taken, watermarked by someone else and spread on.

I don't see how anyone can seriously say it's not such a big deal to see other take credit, fame and praise and sometimes even money out of one's own voluntary work for the community. As I said, if another respectable webmaster takes something and acknowledges the work put into assembling something, fine. The more people get access, the better, but not at the cost of integrity. If something I put together ends up on some lame site with lots of ads and no real contents, not fine.