![Challenge Entry: The Black And White Challenge [challenge entry]](/images/board_posticon_c.gif)
From the The Black And White Challenge challenge. See all 370 entries (closed)
( , Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:20, archived)

perhaps
I thought that, but watermarks ruin the aesthetic
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:22,
archived)
I thought that, but watermarks ruin the aesthetic

but it's a solution... if my images were good enough to be stolen I'd be pissed
also the watermark can be fainter
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:23,
archived)
also the watermark can be fainter

to the best of my knowledge, none of mine ever are
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:25,
archived)

can have an automatic watermark everytime one is submitted
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:29,
archived)

your average troll doesn't know what it is.
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:28,
archived)

for most of my artwork, it does detract a bit but it looks the only way to go.
and a woo to the pic of gene simmons / papa lazarou
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:26,
archived)
and a woo to the pic of gene simmons / papa lazarou

i think what people need to think about is, who do the source pics belong to?
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:27,
archived)

that it's ok for the mags to reward someone who has just sent in other peoples work, but since that work was made by using source images that don't belong to the b3tan they can't complain?
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:34,
archived)

then i think at least technically they'd be liable for copyright infringement.
this can also work in the b3tans favou however if they can prove that zoo have profited from the use of the image, they can then report it to the owner of the original source image who could in turn (at least technically) sue zoo's arse.
which would prolly be a good detterent for them
edit: only trouble is that copyright law is a whily old bugger that is very tricky to interpret in any exact way as far as i know. prolly the only way to find out if it'd stand up is to take them to court and risk losing
( ,
Fri 2 Mar 2007, 11:38,
archived)
this can also work in the b3tans favou however if they can prove that zoo have profited from the use of the image, they can then report it to the owner of the original source image who could in turn (at least technically) sue zoo's arse.
which would prolly be a good detterent for them
edit: only trouble is that copyright law is a whily old bugger that is very tricky to interpret in any exact way as far as i know. prolly the only way to find out if it'd stand up is to take them to court and risk losing