Yet another "stolen" photo

Willie Stroker wrote:
Eric Miller wrote:
"daveFaktor" wrote in message
...
Eric Miller wrote:
Joe Makowiec wrote:
On 19 Jun 2009 in rec.photo.equipment.35mm, Eric Miller wrote:

I tried to do that as well, again with .htaccess, but it didn't work.

I may play with it some tonight when I get a chance.
Your hosting provider may have .htaccess disabled. The simple way
is to rename your picture, then substitute something ("I am a
bandwidth thief" in huge bright pink letters works for me...) under
the file's original name.

My hosting provider has .htaccess enabled. I know this because I am
my own hosting provider. I discovered the problem and do not know
how to resolve it without disabling all links to the page which I do
not want to do. The hotlinking site is hotlinking to the .php file
and not the image itself. If I redirect all links to .php in that
directory, no one will be able to link to the image. I'll just live
with the hotlinking for now because the traffic has started to wane.

Replacing the image creates its own problems because I still want
the original image to be available and renaming it would undermine
that to a certain extent. I'll just live with it for now.

Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com
Eric...
A link to a .php file is not hot linking. The only difference between
a .php file and a .html file is the script it contains and a single
word at the start of the header.

Hot links are links directly to images that display on a web site as
if they were that site owner's images.


Take a look at the following, apply your web genius, and tell me why
the display of this photograph, linked directly to a .php file is not
a hotlink:

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Funny_tri_photo%3A_Careful_with_that_detergent!_P2 379299/


You'll have to scroll down a ways to see the hotlinked image.


Eric... That link is to your web page, not the image. It's not a
"hot-link" it's just a link to a page containing the image. Your site
statistics would show every item on the web page, including any header
images and off-site logos you have on the site as being accessed.





They don't.

Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com

Robert Coe wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 10:11:10 +1000, daveFaktor wrote:
: Paul Furman wrote:
: Bill Graham wrote:
:
: "Eric Miller" wrote in message
: .. .
: The following is a link to one of my photos posted on another website
: without permission.
:
: http://dailyviews.runnersworld.com/2009/06/madam-your-shorts-appear-to-be-sudsy.html
:
: The following is the link to the photo on my website.
:
: http://www.dyesscreek.com/events/index.php?display=ict%2F2009%2Frun%2F_mg_8890.JPG
:
: I do find it mildly annoying that no one asked my permission before
: using it. I don't make any money off these race photos but still, I
: never like it when they are used like this. I'm not going to be
: threatening action against anyone but does anyone have any
: suggestions about how to approach the offender in this situation?
:
: They should publish it again, and give you credit for it the second
: time. It seems to me that that's the least they could do in the way of
: an apology.
:
: I would ask them to add a credit immediately under the photo with a link
: to the larger image on your site. That invites people to browse your
: work in context and boosts your search engine rating just having that
: link. Win-win.
:
: I posted a similar thread last year about a similar event where a local
: CBS radio affiliate posted one of my photos without asking... they
: credit me but link to the event's web site who I had given permission to
: post the photos. This year the event organizers got a better gallery
: system that links direct to my photos as posted on flicker and they also
: added a link to my web site (apart from flickr) so that works out
: nicely. If another newspaper wants to use a pic, it'll be clear that the
: event doesn't own them.
:
: But to share your grumble, it should be common courtesy when using a
: photo on a blog to at least link to the photo on your site. I mean when
: you click the photo... it pops up as the straight jpeg on their
: server... maybe the blogging software is just lame that way and it's not
: simple to add a meaningful link. Anyways, the blogger should take a look
: at how to do that and do so in the future. It gets tedious explaining to
: people all the time.
:
: I'm going through redesigning my personal web site to be a
: photographer's web site, it has evolved through a few topics over the
: last decade g. One task is to write up simple terms and instructions
: for linking, copyright, etc. so the explaining or negotiating process
: doesn't become a tedious passive-agressive-tension-filled nuisance and
: so that prospective paying customers can get a quick concise answer to
: what sort of terms & prices might apply. I've had numerous requests to
: use my photos for free over the years and few knew anything about
: copyright, so it takes a while to explain that there need to be limits
: on the scope of the use. Newspapers these days have contracts saying
: they can re-use your work in other ways. They could publish a book as a
: compilation of articles or sell framed prints, etc.
:
: It's like getting blood from a turnip with the publishers though in
: recent years. For the time being I'm willing to give them up for free
: just to build a decent looking portfolio of published work. Available
: paid on assignment of course in the future g.
:
: What a bloody hypocrite You are Paul.
:
: You stole my images and tried to copyright them for yourself after you
: altered them to degrade them from what I used them for to something you
: could show as fraud... (With a 640 Px image for Christ sake) and make
: out you'd discovered some fraud from me when I pointed out there was no
: image quality difference between a P&S and Canon DSLR worth the $3000
: price difference.
:
: It was you who committed the fraud buster and now you have the cheek to
: set yourself up as a reputable source on copyright? Get real Paul. You
: are nothing but a thief.
:
: Give us break mate. At least tell the guy you are an image thief
: yourself before setting out to lecture him on © copyright laws.

Paul is an "image thief"?? When did that happen? He's not one of those two
dudes you're at war with, is he?

Maybe I'm getting too old for this group; I seem to be having trouble keeping
up. I always thought of Paul as just another camera nut, like me or the
airplane pilot or the savage duck. Now you're telling us he's a thief. You
haven't been reading too much Sherlock Holmes, have you?

I posted some crops to make a point in a usenet argument we had.
No story here.

Paul Furman wrote:
:

Wow, I just updated Thunderbird - that sure made a mess of the formatting!

the whining is the same because it is D-Mac, he obviously got sick of
"D-Mac" coming up at the top of the rankings when "Brisbane's worst
wedding photographer" got put into Google so he has changed his name yet
again, I wonder what fabrication he will come up with to explain the
latest change :-)


I thought your post was a joke but I did the search and here is the first
link, holy crap.

http://www.barratt.com.au/discuss/au...aphy.slut.html

Noons wrote:
On Jun 21, 11:41 pm, Robert Coe wrote:

: D-Mac has periods of differing styles and content. When he gets angry,
: or possibly is drunk or hungover, he does revert to a single style and
: manner. Otherwise, I find him variably aimiable, amusing, helpful,
: repetitive, combative, etc. etc.

I agree with that. Doug isn't a seriously boring PitA like the CHDK Troll or
even Rich ("The Metallurgist") Anderson. If he didn't exist, we might even be
tempted to invent him.

Bob


Didn't you know half his "posts" are not his?
Gawds...

Yeah... There's about 15 D-Mac's posting here. 14 of the m are drunks.

Only the intelligent and mindful posts - the ones showing understanding
and compassion for those poor pathetic individuals who jealously steal
his photos and identity in the hope of passing themselves off as real
photographers are actually from him...

I know the man personally. Not only is he an expert sailor, generous to
a "T" and good looking, he also has an immense understanding of the
peons here who think he's a bit odd... That's probably because he is.

Who was it said the line between insanity and genius was less than the
width of a human hair? Which side will he be on today!

Oh wait.

Am I him today?
Maybe it is not me who is he but he who is me?

Should I be aggressive or placid?

Bugger! I forget.
Help me Noons.
It is you out there isn't it?

--
With age come a new ability ...multi-tasking.
I can laugh, cough, sneeze, fart and pee all at the same time!

ribbit wrote,on my timestamp of 26/06/2009 5:43 AM:

Yeah... There's about 15 D-Mac's posting here. 14 of the m are drunks.

Are they? You can smell alcohol in posts?
Amazing...


I know the man personally. Not only is he an expert sailor, generous to
a "T" and good looking, he also has an immense understanding of the
peons here who think he's a bit odd... That's probably because he is.

I don't know him personally, but I can see when his posts are completely
inconsistent with prior ones, on a number of subjects.
When I check, I see a different IP address on such. That to me says:
it's not him but the ****wit from ACT trying to pass for him.

For the record: he doesn't know enough about networking to steal an IP address.
Capice? It's not an easy operation to do without access to hardware and
dns/dhcp/proxy servers he plainly doesn't have.
It's that inconsistency that tells me there are one or more people here posting
as him.

I also know he was sick a few months ago and incapacitated from posting.
Nevertheless, we still got the usual stream of posts and the consequent idiotic
"bytes".Some people here should actually think twice before going off on
tangents to "his" posts.

Who was it said the line between insanity and genius was less than the
width of a human hair? Which side will he be on today!

Who knows? Are you a qualified psychiatrist to categorically state one or the
other? If so, prove it.
On second thought: don't bother. Anyone posting from your newserver is upfront
labeled as another of the ex-IBM trolls that frequent that place. And the fake
"professors" who follow them.


Oh wait.

Am I him today?
Maybe it is not me who is he but he who is me?

To be or not to be,


Should I be aggressive or placid?

that is usually the question.


Bugger! I forget.
Help me Noons.
It is you out there isn't it?


No. I'm just another instance of myself. I got that way when I started to use
C++ and found out that was me over there.

Noons wrote:
ribbit wrote,on my timestamp of 26/06/2009 5:43 AM:

I don't know him personally, but I can see when his posts are completely
inconsistent with prior ones, on a number of subjects.
When I check, I see a different IP address on such. That to me says:
it's not him but the ****wit from ACT trying to pass for him.

For the record: he doesn't know enough about networking to steal an IP
address.
Capice? It's not an easy operation to do without access to hardware and
dns/dhcp/proxy servers he plainly doesn't have.
It's that inconsistency that tells me there are one or more people here
posting as him.


Just to clear "the record" up (it really is me now).
(For those who think I'm the instigator of all the crap flying around
these groups)...

My IP address is permanent - has been for several years after I bought a
fixed line to run my own mail server and be sure my clients were not
getting hijacked at the door after Bret Douglas began impersonating me
to set up sites using my name and published 'doctored' images of mine
he'd stolen from my (then) Goddady hosted web site.

As soon as he found out I was spending real money to 'look' at him, I
stopped getting Messages like:
---------------------
"Fill in the appropriate fields to reset your password and click Submit.
You will then be able to access your account.
If you did not forget your password, please ignore this email.
This request was made from: IP address: 74.234.223.59"
--------------------
That one took just a few moments to discover Bret Douglas had been
trying illegally for many weeks to gain access to my E-bay seller account.

74.234.223.59 is a Bell south IP address assigned to an ADSL service in
Chattanooga, Tennessee USA. where Bret Douglas (also know as Bret Hogan)
was recorded as living.

That last part cost me $600 to get a lawyer to nudge AOL into coughing
up the identity of the thieving son-of-a-bitch.


I also know he was sick a few months ago and incapacitated from posting.
Nevertheless, we still got the usual stream of posts and the consequent
idiotic "bytes".Some people here should actually think twice before
going off on tangents to "his" posts.



Much to the disappointment of a few and the joy of many, I survived 6
hours of surgery on my back. I have a few issues with metal detectors
now but at least they don't have to wheel me through the airport any more!

If the Son of a bitch calling himself Annika1980 has any skills at all,
it's deflecting the scorn and ridicule he so richly deserves. Nothing
new in trying to make your victim look as if they are the dodgy one.
I guess whoever taught him to read is the one we ought to feel sorry for.

Whoever it is in Australia that is impersonating me in these groups, has
one trait common with Annink1980. Neither of them will spend a cent if
they can use a free resource. They have other things in common too.

Getting Mail2news servers shut down is a dead set waste of money. They
are like weeds. Pull one out and 2 more pop up in their place. Been
there, done that stuff. Restraining orders only work when the person you
take one out against actually exists!

Eventually Jeff Ralph and the idiot calling himself "PeterD" who think
they are just so smart ...will trip up and then we'll get to see how
fancy their footwork really is. They may well have an adversity to
spending money but I don't. Particularly if it is going to bring them to
task.

In the mean time, you can all be pretty sure if the header shows the
Berlin university as my news server, despite the name change, the post
is probably genuinely from me if... ROTFL.

ribbit wrote:

Eventually Jeff Ralph and the idiot calling himself "PeterD" who think
they are just so smart ...will trip up and then we'll get to see how
fancy their footwork really is. They may well have an adversity to
spending money but I don't. Particularly if it is going to bring them
to task.

"To task" for what Doug?

You have my snailmail address. Use it you need to contact me.

In the meantime:
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html

Ahhh... that link.
It asks for so little, yet gives so much.

What happened to your last 'nym, Doug?
Someone explain it to you?

hehehe

--
Jeff R.

"ribbit" wrote in message
...
Noons wrote:
ribbit wrote,on my timestamp of 26/06/2009 5:43 AM:

I don't know him personally, but I can see when his posts are completely
inconsistent with prior ones, on a number of subjects.
When I check, I see a different IP address on such. That to me says:
it's not him but the ****wit from ACT trying to pass for him.

For the record: he doesn't know enough about networking to steal an IP
address.
Capice? It's not an easy operation to do without access to hardware and
dns/dhcp/proxy servers he plainly doesn't have.
It's that inconsistency that tells me there are one or more people here
posting as him.


Just to clear "the record" up (it really is me now).
(For those who think I'm the instigator of all the crap flying around
these groups)...

My IP address is permanent - has been for several years after I bought a
fixed line to run my own mail server and be sure my clients were not
getting hijacked at the door after Bret Douglas began impersonating me to
set up sites using my name and published 'doctored' images of mine he'd
stolen from my (then) Goddady hosted web site.

As soon as he found out I was spending real money to 'look' at him, I
stopped getting Messages like:
---------------------
"Fill in the appropriate fields to reset your password and click Submit.
You will then be able to access your account.
If you did not forget your password, please ignore this email.
This request was made from: IP address: 74.234.223.59"
--------------------
That one took just a few moments to discover Bret Douglas had been trying
illegally for many weeks to gain access to my E-bay seller account.

74.234.223.59 is a Bell south IP address assigned to an ADSL service in
Chattanooga, Tennessee USA. where Bret Douglas (also know as Bret Hogan)
was recorded as living.

That last part cost me $600 to get a lawyer to nudge AOL into coughing up
the identity of the thieving son-of-a-bitch.


I also know he was sick a few months ago and incapacitated from posting.
Nevertheless, we still got the usual stream of posts and the consequent
idiotic "bytes".Some people here should actually think twice before going
off on tangents to "his" posts.



Much to the disappointment of a few and the joy of many, I survived 6
hours of surgery on my back.

so you finally got a spine, so how about you use it for an apology and a
real stepped out panno, not that piece of **** you keep referring everyone
to, or are you really that retarded that you think its a fine example ??

--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi

"ribbit" wrote in message
...
Noons wrote:
ribbit wrote,on my timestamp of 26/06/2009 5:43 AM:

I don't know him personally, but I can see when his posts are completely
inconsistent with prior ones, on a number of subjects.
When I check, I see a different IP address on such. That to me says:
it's not him but the ****wit from ACT trying to pass for him.

For the record: he doesn't know enough about networking to steal an IP
address.
Capice? It's not an easy operation to do without access to hardware and
dns/dhcp/proxy servers he plainly doesn't have.
It's that inconsistency that tells me there are one or more people here
posting as him.


Just to clear "the record" up (it really is me now).
(For those who think I'm the instigator of all the crap flying around
these groups)...

My IP address is permanent - has been for several years after I bought a
fixed line to run my own mail server and be sure my clients were not
getting hijacked at the door after Bret Douglas began impersonating me to
set up sites using my name and published 'doctored' images of mine he'd
stolen from my (then) Goddady hosted web site.

As soon as he found out I was spending real money to 'look' at him, I
stopped getting Messages like:
---------------------
"Fill in the appropriate fields to reset your password and click Submit.
You will then be able to access your account.
If you did not forget your password, please ignore this email.
This request was made from: IP address: 74.234.223.59"
--------------------
That one took just a few moments to discover Bret Douglas had been trying
illegally for many weeks to gain access to my E-bay seller account.

74.234.223.59 is a Bell south IP address assigned to an ADSL service in
Chattanooga, Tennessee USA. where Bret Douglas (also know as Bret Hogan)
was recorded as living.

That last part cost me $600 to get a lawyer to nudge AOL into coughing up
the identity of the thieving son-of-a-bitch.


I also know he was sick a few months ago and incapacitated from posting.
Nevertheless, we still got the usual stream of posts and the consequent
idiotic "bytes".Some people here should actually think twice before going
off on tangents to "his" posts.



Much to the disappointment of a few and the joy of many, I survived 6
hours of surgery on my back. I have a few issues with metal detectors now
but at least they don't have to wheel me through the airport any more!

If the Son of a bitch calling himself Annika1980 has any skills at all,
it's deflecting the scorn and ridicule he so richly deserves. Nothing new
in trying to make your victim look as if they are the dodgy one.
I guess whoever taught him to read is the one we ought to feel sorry for.

Whoever it is in Australia that is impersonating me in these groups, has
one trait common with Annink1980. Neither of them will spend a cent if
they can use a free resource. They have other things in common too.

Getting Mail2news servers shut down is a dead set waste of money. They are
like weeds. Pull one out and 2 more pop up in their place. Been there,
done that stuff. Restraining orders only work when the person you take one
out against actually exists!

Eventually Jeff Ralph and the idiot calling himself "PeterD" who think
they are just so smart ...will trip up and then we'll get to see how fancy
their footwork really is. They may well have an adversity to spending
money but I don't. Particularly if it is going to bring them to task.

In the mean time, you can all be pretty sure if the header shows the
Berlin university as my news server, despite the name change, the post is
probably genuinely from me if... ROTFL.


Quite seriously Dog, if you had a brain you would be dangerous.