|
|
Posted by Els on 07/13/06 23:02
code_wrong wrote:
> "Els" <els.aNOSPAM@tiscali.nl> wrote in message
> news:cimk5rvlyng.12focxqk54dma.dlg@40tude.net...
>> Michael Laplante wrote:
>>
>>> I know the answer is "No, because there are always work arounds and the
>>> user
>>> can do a screencap as a last resort"
>>>
>>> But I'm a stubborn bastard and started thinking about it. How about an
>>> animated gif with each image composed of half the original, or
>>> alternating
>>> bands with the reverse image? The viewer would sorta see the image to get
>>> an
>>> idea, but it would be a lot of work, if not impossible for them to grab
>>> the
>>> gif and reconstitute the original.
>>>
>>> Hey stop laughing. . . No, I haven't tried it but was wondering if it
>>> inspired anyone with a new idea, or if they had heard of similar tricks
>>> to
>>> render an image difficult to steal.
>>
>> Heard/read plenty of tricks, but the word "screenshot" always comes
>> into play. And even without that - you cut the picture up, I'll glue
>> it together again. You make a reverse image, I'll re-reverse it.
>>
>> Of course, you could show your colour pictures in black and white, and
>> yes, then I would not be able to copy the colours. But then you didn't
>> show me the colours either. End of it always is: if I see it, I can
>> steal it.
>
> how about displaying images in a java applet with an effect over it ....
> something which is perceived differently when slowed or stopped ... like
> water which when stilled makes a mess of the still image... (c) patent
> pending , patent pending, patent pending ...
It's called flash, video, or animated gif. People can't watch the
image properly either, so I don't count that as "showing an image
which can't be stolen". Besides - a screenshot is quick enough to not
get a blur from the moving image.
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|