If you use IE6 and have the cursor on top of an image (with the
right-click-blocked on that page), there is still the file save icon
appearing so it's not even necessary to go into the cache.
Frits Wüthrich
Amita Guha wrote:
> Sorry to jump into this thread so late. No one has
> mentioned the i
- Original Message -
From: "Amita Guha"
Subject: RE: Watermakrs
> Sorry to jump into this thread so late. No one has
> mentioned the infamous right-click-blocker
> Javascript, which of course can't prevent the user
> from going into his/her browser cache t
Sorry to jump into this thread so late. No one has
mentioned the infamous right-click-blocker
Javascript, which of course can't prevent the user
from going into his/her browser cache to retrieve
the image, but then at least it takes a little
more effort to do so.
I recently met a photog who told
In a message dated 11/21/01 12:13:51 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> . "This would make the simple visible copyright notice in the image one of
> the better protections -- although easy to remove, it would make it very
> difficult for the thief to claim they didn't know
In a message dated 11/16/01 9:43:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Save the good stuff for the paying customer and don't make it too available
Thanks.
Mafud
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to h
Some general thoughts on the subject:
Watermarks may be useful, but it's not foolproof.
They're supposed to provide some proof of ownership, and perhaps security.
In digital work the origin (closely related to ownership) may be next to impossible to
prove.
Whereas with chemical photography, you
6 matches
Mail list logo
