So called "copyright" pictures - Page 2

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary

Translate This Thread From English to

Threaded View
Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I think I remember reading about the Digimark digital watermark which
could survive being printed and then scanned. I have tried checking on
their website but despaired at the sight of so much content-free prose.

Phil


Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Approximately 11/23/03 17:12, Phil uttered for posterity:

Quoted text here. Click to load it
   I have the Digimark as part of another app, and it does survive
   printing and scanning...with the disclaimer that print and scan
   were done at resolutions intended to preserve, not corrupt.

--
Still a Raiders fan, but no longer sure why.


Re: So called "copyright" pictures

<snip>
Quoted text here. Click to load it

That would make sense.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You might be surprised... did she sign anything at all ?
That industry sees the customer as a revenue stream, and not as a
client who hired time and equipment.
Thus the 'downstream' cash flow is important for them to protect, and
from what you say, it seems Kodak considers them enough of a revenue
stream ( or a lawsuit risk ? :) to add protection.

Years ago, there was talk of a similar 'watermark' scheme for EPROMS
that I presume was threshold-margin related - ie chip worked fine at
5V, but at some other Vcc (probably higher) you could find some bits
going away before others, and so detect a watermark.

-jg



Re: So called "copyright" pictures
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 23:14:07 GMT, the renowned CBFalconer

Quoted text here. Click to load it

'Taint the way the law works. Unless the photographer specifically
agreed to do a "work for hire" (which professional portrait-type
photographers are typically loathe to do), the default is that he/she
owns the copyright to the photos. Of course they can't use them
without your permission, but they can extract a fee for you to copy
them.

Anyway, and speaking only technically, this kind of digital watermark
or steganography can be easily defeated in an image editing program by
adding some Gaussian noise and then filtering the image. There might
be some slight loss in quality. Newer versions of image-editing
programs may refuse to do it, or may renew the watermark- I have not
kept up with that kind of digital rights management issues.

You might be able to get an acceptable result with optical filtering
by overlaying the photo and a sheet of pebble or frosted plastic, but
that's just speculation. Presumably there's a preview screen so you
wouldn't waste any money giving it a shot. Of course actually making a
copy you would phone up the copyright owner and offer to pay whatever
they feel it is worth, right?

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
snipped-for-privacy@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

There have been a lot of posts on this thread.  So I might as well jump
in here.  

The assumption that a watermark can be defeated by adding noise is not
always accurate.  There is a lot of ways to add redundancy so that a
signal can be easily extracted in the presence of noise.  In fact, the
original picture is actually noise for the "hidden" watermark.  So
adding a little more noise would not create a problem for recovering the
watermark.  Think of it as a question of signal to noise ratio.  You can
recover a signal that has a negative signal to noise ratio if you use
enough redundancy.  That is how they send signals from deep space probes
back to earth.  

--

Rick "rickman" Collins

snipped-for-privacy@XYarius.com
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

That is roughly what I thought might be going on.  I couldn't
remember the word "steganography" :-)  However it seems too
complex to apply in the printing process.

In part my message is a warning to people who are buying such
services that they are not getting what they paid for.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

As I pointed out somewhere in the original, the photographer has
disappeared.  All that is left is the prints.  I suspect the
algorithm is in the actual print paper proper, since I can hardly
conceive of playing games in the optics of the camera and
enlarger.  Of the things mentioned I would lean towards the
infra-red/ultra-violet etc. out of band watermarking of the paper.

--
Chuck F ( snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com) ( snipped-for-privacy@worldnet.att.net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

    Whenever I remember it, I think of

http://www.uky.edu/ArtsSciences/Geology/webdogs/time/jurassic/jura5.htm

... a photograph of the kind of hardware alt.folklore.computers
is most devoted to.  ;-)

--
snipped-for-privacy@sun.com

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Approximately 11/24/03 11:53, Eric Sosman uttered for posterity:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

  Ahh, an early IBM system I see....

--
Still a Raiders fan, but no longer sure why.


Re: So called "copyright" pictures
I'd be happy to scan those puppies in for you, although if you're not in th LA
area, you'd be nuts to send them to me.


--
 _
Kevin D. Quitt              91387-4454             snipped-for-privacy@Quitt.net
           96.37% of all statistics are made up

Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Shouldn't this be followed by ", including this one" ?


--
Arargh311 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com
BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html

We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures


Quoted text here. Click to load it

No - it wasn't made up.

--
 _
Kevin D. Quitt              91387-4454             snipped-for-privacy@Quitt.net
           96.37% of all statistics are made up

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Actually, he'd be nuts to send them to *anyone* who offered to engage in
a flagrant and willful violation of copyright law in an international
forum :)   The plaintiff's case against both would be trivial to make.

Just to clear things up:

The photographer owns the copyright; it's that simple.  I've litigated
one of these, on behalf of the photographer, against a chain that
reproduced prints.

It came to light when the client was so distressed by the quality of the
duplicates that she went to the photorapher.  

I don't know the final outcome, as I closed down for grad school fairly
early, but the law is clear.

The photographer was angry about the illegal copying, but even angrier
at the low quality prints attached to his reputation . . .

While I'm at it, I'll briefly touch on the economics involved.

It is unlikely that a photographer would accept a basic fee that didn't
cover the *marginal* costs of the shoot--his time and out of pockets.
However, if the norm is that many family members buy copies, it is
entirely possible, even likely, that he would accept a fee that didn't
cover the *average* costs of production, which would include the studio
rent, equipment, etc.

hawk, lawyer & economist
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics    /"\   ASCII ribbon campaign
snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu  Smeal 178  (814) 375-4700      \ /   against HTML mail
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

In this situation is it the chain or the client who are liable for
copyright infringement?

Andy

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it




Both.  THe photographer only sought damages against the chain.

hawk
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics    /"\   ASCII ribbon campaign
snipped-for-privacy@psu.edu  Smeal 178  (814) 375-4700      \ /   against HTML mail
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Which law?
Specify law/jurisdiction as this is an international NG. You could be
talking about a foreign law..

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England    /\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/ snipped-for-privacy@phaedsys.org       www.phaedsys.org \/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it
Good point, but copyright law is basically the same in all countries
that signed the Berne convention, which is most of the major ones.

You can check at
http://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/berne_convention_signatories.htm

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures

Quoted text here. Click to load it

True now, but the United States didn't join until 1989.  I think we
were the last major country.  Before that, there was a more universal
convention (the name escapes me at the moment) which did not set a
required term but only required signatory governments to give the same
protection to works copyrighted in other countries that they gave to
works copyrighted in their own country.

-- Patrick

Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

The GIMP won't.  Adobe Photoshop has some degree of direct integration with
Digimark, so it's quite possible that it might refuse.

--
Nate Edel                    http://www.nkedel.com /

"But Marge! I've never felt so accepted in my life. These people looked deep
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: So called "copyright" pictures
Quoted text here. Click to load it

It depends what software you're using to do the scanning; if you've
noticed, when you import from a TWAIN device in, say, Photoshop,
before it will finish importing the picture it goes through a
"watermark detection" phase.

By the way, many of those standalone devices also have currency
detection.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Sorry, but legally, the photographer owns the copyright unless it was
explicitly assigned to you in a contract of sale. Wedding
photographers love to stick it to you vigorously by charging for
albums. When we were choosing wedding photographers, one of our
criteria was to make sure we would own the copyright and negatives.

Re: So called "copyright" pictures


[...]
Quoted text here. Click to load it

There has to be something in copyright law to be said about the
disappearance of the author.


Site Timeline