Spit, you can still open links in a new window. Just read the postings after leather-guys post. CTRL-Shit-LeftMousButton does the trick. J.

I'm torn about this. I do like the idea of stopping Image thiefs. However if ppl want to save my images and have for their own personal enjoyment on their computer I'm only honoured. And this doesn't really stop the thiefs...they will always get what they want. The thought of this is nice.. but it hurts the wrong ppl. =/

derjimi LOL read post 49. If you're used to using right-click you forget what the shortcut is. Why should we all have to put sticky notes on our monitors just for Rendo?

Wow someone opened a can of worms here eh? It is nice to know that there are steps being attempted to keep multi ID users from stealing other artist work and calling it their own and I have seen this done many time at Renderosity recently especially. To be frank Renderosity should consider a new approach to eliminate non accountability. If you have an ISP then you more than likely have an email from that ISP and there is no need to use a 3rd person type email like...let, see YAHOO. It is possible to get Yahoo accounts from all over the globe and literally be 100's of IDs here at Rendersoity. This give an unfair advantage to voting and commenting as I watch the same spelling errors make comment after comment and then get an unusual amount of voting. It is so obvious it makes me sick. I think a verifiable email is needed and the user can choose if they would like others to view it. But if there is ever a problem with the individual it can be tracked easily and action can be taken. I think Drac made the comment that it is up to the artist to take action and that is the common attitude of thieves and cheats that use alias type IDs and emails. Sure come and get me because you don't know who I am. That makes a whole lot of sense. I find there are many software companies have forums that require you to log in using your product id number and I think that is about as tight as you can get it because the product had to downloaded to an ISP and or be sent somewhere that is traceable. Believe me I myself have been attacked by these thieves and cheats and it is not a fun thing to have to go through. When I find the kid I will prosecute to the fullest degree of the law and then some believe me. BTW I will find him or die trying. Thanks for reading, `shoop

This site wide lack of rt-clk is very inconenient! To IM someone I must exit the gallery/image or forum first. Not good IMHO!

So what do you guys/gals suggest the mods do to keep your art from being stolen? They come up with something and get attacked for it. They are trying to deal with the problem, so instead of jumping on them why don't you figure out a foolproof way, (other than not putting your pics up), or quit complaining when they are stolen. I hate theives, don't care if it's software or art so please don't think I advocate the theft of your art. But I also think that if you don't like an idea, come up with a better solution. Sorry, just my opinion. Marque

I give my work away. It is my pleasure to see it enjoyed. BTW Marque, I agree with the don't jump on them, if you can't propose... that's why I asked for the ability to set the permissions for my works back at the first reply to the original post. I know it is not a perfect solution but it fits my philosophy.

I sometimes keep peoples images for reference, especially in the photos section, as I want to know how they did stuff, or if its a good picture of a particular kind of animal or plant, or scenery, furniture, etc, I like keeping them around as reference for when I model my own. Not theft as I never use any part of their images in the creation of my work, it is only for reference and inspiration. at least I can still save the webpage and get the image that way g I understand about image theft, it sucks, but I'm not very concerned about it happening to me. Its mostly idiots that do it, and if someone is stupid enough to buy what I give away for free as simply examples of my work... dunno... caveat emptor on them I guess. Its the skills that matter to me, you can't steal them, and you can't duplicate my art style if you don't have similar skills. People with similar skills are going to do their own thing... why bother ripping off someone else when you don't have to... I like having the right click menu, as I often open new browser windows via right click. It cripples the browser software and so I don't much like it turned off. Besides, I doubt Mac users are much affected by the situation, they don't have rightclick menus. And printscreen always works. I'm far more concerned about the theft that goes on in the freestuff and marketplace with warez items, not too concerned about the galleries.

I appreciate the efforts to protect us but aren't we cutting off our nose to spite our face? I think that downloading of my images for personal use by someone else is a complement to my ability. Art hack that I am, I would be thrilled that someone would think my work good enough to steal. I assume that downloading going to happen any time I put an image up. Changing the galleries would make it harder for this type of casual personal use to occur. It will have a far greater impact on our casual users and do nothing to stop art thieves. Anyone with enough brains to set up their own website and even set up paypal or a merchant account to sell art knows enough code to bypass this barrier. I can come up with at least two ways to get jpg, mpg, mov content off an active browser. Here is one of the latest posted. I shrank it 50% and watermarked it out of difference to what you are trying to accomplish. I remember going to a website and thinking wow this guy's poser work is really great. That was until I recognized a piece by Michael Whelan. I do think this is a problem. But it's a problem that needs to be addressed on the other end. Prosecution and closing of offending sites will eliminate these people while leaving the galleries open for the enjoyment of our own members. We live in a society afraid to take risks. We might get robbed; therefore lets make the gallery images inaccessible. We could prosecute the thief or complain to the web host. What if we loose or the Rosity member decides not to press charges? We leave ourselves open to countersuits and damages. Lets just slap a band-aid on the problem. Lets just build higher walls while the thief runs around outside unchecked. Why don't you just close the galleries? That will make it 100% sure pictures can never be taken from Renderosity again. I'm sorry I don't agree with this philosophy. My wife can't get the drugs she needs for MS because they can be used to get high or cause birth defects and can't be risked. My kids and 50,000,000 others can't use metal protractors in math or wear army or camos because 2kids went nuts three states away four years ago. Everyone is guilty therefore lets take the opportunity away from all.

Honestly, if you want to display your works, there is NOTHING you can do that is 100% foolproof to stop "image theft". No matter what you may try to do with java and controlling a user's cache, there are always non-standard browsers that will be able to get around this (especially open-source browsers that can be modified as needed by anyone who knows basic coding). Even if java script is used for calling up images and not just blocking them (say, to call up images via some encrypted naming convention instead of the current sequential names), I guarantee you I could write a script to harvest the images from Renderosity's site, if I was so inclined, just by perusing the java code. Trust me, there are little hackerz out there that could do that and more, if so inclined or challenged. Additionally, there is ALWAYS the "print screen". Even if the image is larger than the screeen or broken into pieces, someone with time/Photoshop can always cut/paste back together. Embedded/encoded watermarks are useless, as printscreen takes care of these. On-iamge watermarks are partially effective, but mostly only if they cover up significant portions of the image itself. And even this can be gotten around by someone who knows what they are doing with image editing. Using a sample of the basic watermark colors and a histogram of the image, along with filtering software that many iamge professionals have access to (also assuming the warex-kiddies), a talented person can modify the inherent image and remove most of the watermark in a manner similar to post-editing with relatively little work. The simple solution, especially for people like Marque and Dialyn, is DON'T POST. Instant, permanent, ABSOLUTE solution. There is nothing you can do that cannot be worked around. Since you (pointing to Dialyn only because he/she was the only one with a distinct voice against the right-lick (this is not meant as a personal attack, just a statement of fact)) consider people even keeping a copy for personal enjoyment (e.g., to look at, to learn from etc, and not resell or use in any commercial manner) STEALING, then that is your one and only solution. Keep your art to yourself and any direct customers. That is the only way you will ever be happy. You do realize that the VAST majority of people who may keep an image are doing so because it provides them with some sort of emotional resonance - joy/humour/fear/revulsion/melancholy... I hate to break it to you, but in the US, current law pretty much will support this as NOT stealing, in a similar manner as people taping TV shows for later viewing/keeping, as long as they do not sell them or rebroadcast them for commercial purposes. Remember, it is only a very small group of imdividuals (as a percentage) that are taking the images and doing anything comercial with them. If you do not want to risk any specific image being "stolen" - do not post it. End of story. And FYI, The right-click is a method some of us use to open multiple browsers windows to cut down on load times so that many iamges can be loaded/viewed at once. With the vast quantity of images uploaded each day, this is one of the few ways to queue up images to view without spending an hour trying to keep up. - Ray

Okay, just read what I posted, and the spelling errors are rather embarassing... But I still stand by the content!!!!

It's pretty amusing, all in all. Everyone has been upset about graphic theft for a long time. So Renderosity tries to do something to discourage it (okay, it won't work for the dedicated thieves but at least it is a step). So then all the people who have been happily downloading without asking permission of the artists are upset because it is inconvenient for them. So is it true than that everyone only wants their own graphics protected against theft, but they want nothing to stop themselves from lifting any graphic they like? That's the feeling I'm getting. What a double standard that is. Don't even bother to tell me how upset you are about someone stealing your graphics if you are downloading without permission. Be hypocrites on your own time from now on. "Oh, no, it's not the same thing...because it is special me that's doing it and not some low life stationary maker." No, my dears. It is the same thing. No permission. You've no right to what someone else created. Be as convulted as you like in your protests but it is all the same. And it would take only courtesy and respect for your fellow artists to gain permission...which would probably be happily given in most cases. What does it tell you that you can't be bothered to do that little bit to show that you're an honorable human being. I'm sorry, that was asking a lot wasn't it. I'm gone from this thread. The bull being thrown around here is too much for me.

anyone may have my pictures and do what they want with them

There is a way to encrypt your images and I think there is a company that does it for fee. It would be interesting to see where your work goes if nothing else. Gee, I got a ton in the US, or Japan or where ever. It would be nice if it sent you message that the image has been altered and from where. This all I am sure MUST be possible dont you think? Thanks, shoop

I think it's an honor to have people use my images as backgrounds if they so choose. I stamp each image w/ my signature (lately I have been), although that can be overcome by simply using the rubber stamp tool. Either way, if they ask for permission that's awfully nice of them, but at the same time, if they want to use it personally, it's all good. And hell, if they're selling my stuff w/o me knowing, then it's not really gonna hurt me much because I won't know a darn thing. If I DO find out, well, that's when trouble happens...but until that happens, download away. I like Spike's suggestion of maybe putting up an extra disclaimer or something, or have the artist check something saying they waive their right or understand the fact that their work will be downloaded, etc. How about if they don't check it, they won't be able to upload? Hell, it's not Renderosity's fault people may "steal work"...ya know? MD

I agree with Dialyn!!! Sheesh, what's WRONG with you people... you clog the forum with your complaints that art is being stolen (and you have a right to be pissed), and now something gets done and you get even louder???

This is not really protection. I think the ones smart enough to make money from other people's work are smart enough to work around this simple "protection". For example, I'm using Apple's browser Safari and I don't need to right-click - I just drag the image to my desktop. But, if I try and do the right-click, I still get my context menu as usual. This is about as useless as copy-protection on CDs.

I never said the artists do not have a legitimate beef/issue/whatever. They do. I just pointed out the FACT there there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that is foolproof, or even remotely so, in regards to this issue. To believe anything else is to delude yourself. If an artist does not want to risk an image being used for any purpose at any place other than the embedded web page served up from Rendersity, then DO NOT POST the image. It is as simple as that. Anyone wanting to make a moral argument about "saving" the images for PERSONAL use needs to read my previous message. In the USA, the LAW supports keeping a "broadcasted" image for personal use as long as the image is not redistributed or used in any commercial way. You may not agree with this, but that is irrelevant to the current issue of actually protecting images. There are and always will be ways around image protection as long as the unerlying functions of a PC are programmable and not locked down. - Ray (who does work for a company that develops digital media and software, and is very concerned about piracy of our applications/content, so knows what he is talking about)

You get me wrong. I'm for protecting other people's work if they desire it. I'm just saying this solution will not work. I've already circumvented it and posted evidence in message 61. I also have not been spouting how I did it. Figure that out on your own time if you're a thief. Let me say again; There is no possible way to keep people from downloading an image from a public server. There are ways to prosecute people who take such images and sell them for profit. It will require Renderosity allowing each artist to post a copyright statement on their gallery page to the effect that: 1. I allow download of my artwork to the browser cache only. No saving on the computer or printing to other media real or electronic. 2. I allow personal download and storage or printing. Resale is prohibited. Free distribution may or may not be allowed with or without the attached copyright statement. 3. I don't care. rob me blind. If a statement of your intent for your work accompanies your artwork and the only source or sources contain that copyright statement then you can take legal action against people who steal and sell your work. I'm sure Renderosity does not want to get into the legal hassles or cost involved. You would be acting on your own since it is your complaint against the person who stole from you, not renderosity against hostX. Renderosity can code this statement to float along with your work in the galleries just like they keep your name with your pictures.

I think the mods mean well with this and congrats to them for trying to do something about the problem.

However, I think the current solution hurts the majority (who are honest users) and does little if anything to stop image piracy.

Anyone in the business of stealing images probably knows all the tricks and a few besides. And if they did not they will learn them in this thread and elsewhere.

The only net result of this measure will be the vast majority of Renderosity gallery browsers and the artists posting annoyed at the new measures because of the inconvenience.

Unless of course this measure is really about reducing bandwidth costs to Renderosity by disabling people from opening multiple windows....but then that is another story.

Regards
STORM

I only consider it theft of my work when someone else tries to claim that they have made it (as I stated previously - attribution!). If someone does this and it is brought to my attention then I am all for tearing them a new aperature. In this regard I do not in any way hold renderosity, renderotica, gay poser art or compuserve's graphics forum responsible other than to assist me upon proof and if the offender is a member of such organisation. My works are all intended for download and personal viewing or wallpaper (that's what I make them for for my use!). Commercial distribution is not acceptable without my permission which I am more than willing to discuss. I was more than pleased to grant such for the renderosity DVD!! Richard

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/polls.ez

There were discussions regarding image theft and what Renderosity could do to protect images in the copyright forum. We knew that this move would not stop people if they really wanted the image but we thought this would help decrease it some. We did not expect the outcome of this change to be viewed as negative. So what we would like to do is put this to a poll. Please place your vote. This poll with end Monday. We will remove the features until we have all the results from the poll. thanks for providing your feedback. tammy

I'll post the same thing I did in the Bryce gallery where this thread was cross posted... heheh... If someone thinks one of my pics is good enough to be their screen background, then I'm all for it. It's likely they're not making a profit from it, and they get to enjoy my art work. Now if they were to try and put my images on various items for sale and hawk them as their own - then we have issues. (But considering the vastness of the physical world spanned by the net, it's unlikely that I could really go after someone on that.) But that right click disabled thing while seemingly clever, isn't all that great an idea. Any schmoe worth their 2 that knows how to use a program with a screen capture capability can snag an image. So the point of this is?

Tammymc, I really hate to say this, but I would like to add one caveat to my vote. If we do go with this, can we as individual artists set this permission. I ask this as the poll is a yes/no/don't care issue. Regardless, thanks for listening.

Remember folks, this is a free and open site. Anyone in the world can sign up for a username and password. Renderosity does not charge a member fee, or charge a viewing fee per picture for the galleries. Renderosity cannot act on its own against an art thief unless it can show loss of income. This means they would have to show income from the viewing of your work in order to protect it and sue. Are you willing to pay a monthly membership, or fees per view in the galleries? If not, it's up to you to police and protect your own interests. Renderosity cannot act in your interests if it does not even know what your interests are (ie a statement of your copyright wishes in writing). Renderosity also would be insane to act to protect your interests to it's own loss by paying lawyer and filing fees on your behalf or even long distance to an offending IP. What's in it for Renderosity if they can't even recover expenses? Are you willing to sign over publishing rights to all pictures posted in the galleries in exchange for this protection? You have here a free site with a large bandwidth where you can be seen by hundreds of viewers without taking a hit on your own IP and paying a monthly fee. You seem to think they are Michael Ovitz and you are Tom Clancy. They are not visibly making any money from your work and any actions they can take cut into their overhead. If you want protection get picked up by a real publisher or post on a pay only site.

Excuse a possibly ignorant question, to what do you refer when you talk of the image toolbar?

It would be difficult for us to to set this up where it was decided by the artists. Either we do this as a group or not. We only want to help and are not trying to create obstacles. So everyone that wants to have a voice should vote. tammy

Well a poll is nice and will not be correct as you have hundreds of ids that can sway the results. I bet now you will see a rise in members signing up under third person emails like yahoo ect. This poll will not reflect anything but the real issue you have of multi IDs and non accountability. Third party emails should be not allowed. Thank you.

Hey, electroglyph@yahoo is the account I set up just for renderosity. It's the only account I use and the only name I log in under. I've switched from bellsouth to comcast to knowlogy at home. I wanted an email for my products that could stay static so customers could reach me and I could log into when I went out of state. My home ISP is tied to my phone or cable and at least one was not set up for remote dialup. I also got tired of netcom folding into mindspring folding into earthlink and having to change. Yahoo has stayed put for years, and people do pay for yahoo accounts too.

1. Downloading an imaghe onto your computer hard drive is NOT STEALING. People posted the image for the purpose of it being viewed by other people, what difference does it make if i view it on a web page or on my desk top? 2. From a viewer persepective, this system hurts the viewer. They must locate the image on renderosity anytime they want to view it, then wait for it to load, or else they must work around it by finding the image source file, in which case they would be marked stealing. If they would like to request the image, they must ask abnd wait for a a reply from EVERY artist whom has an image they want to save. 3. From an artist's perspective, this system hurts the artist. They must reply to requests for people who want to use there images. In turn, they also must find a place to host their images elsewhere, or else they would have to hack into there images in the same way a "theif" would just to be able to give a direct link to people who requested it! If people are concered about stealing, they may take their own steps to prevent it. They make a choice to post their images here, and they agreed to the TOS here: "Renderosity provides a variety of communication services to members. These include: forums, gallaries, chat rooms, message boards, and instant messaging. Any information provided by members using these services is considered public information and is logged. Renderosity has access to these communications and will review them if needed. Renderosity will not be held responsible and/or liable for information that members choose to share via these services. We strongly recommend that members exercise forethought and caution prior to disclosing any personal information while using these services."

i made a suggestion in post #18 "to completely disable the "stealing" of artwork.. you have to remove the caching ability of the images or use a JAVA based program that will display the images but NOT cache them. even allowing users to upload to a server folder named no_cache, under their username, will help a little more. " embed a watermark in the java based program so U will see the pic but wording that goes across the middle of the pic.

I can still right click and sve image as..... I actually like this feature as I have several works here that are here and no where elose so I like being able to grab them from here with the save as.

the only (alsmost fool proof) is to create a table and use the image as a background and put an invisible gif over bg image ( doesn't solve the cahe of course but if they drag it to their desktop they only get a blank gif)

Aye, it seems ridiculous, but all and every and any security measures become useless on a long enough timeline. This one's usefulness lasted about 4 seconds, the time it takes my computer to load up Hypersnap DX-4. I don't steal images, I like to look at them and show them to people. I'm not going to steal any images, but if it's on my screen, I'll look at it whenever I want. If you don't want me or other people around me to view your stuff, don't post it on the internet, period. And if you're worried about someone "stealing" your art, just post it in an appropriate size so it can't be printed. 'Nuff said.

I didn't realize this had just come up today, had been gone for a week or so and thought it had hit somewhere in between.

I would have to vote No given the current options, though I can certainly see how some artists would want this protection. I'm not against artists having the option to do this (even though, honestly, it provides no protection from the thieves that would steal their artwork for money anyway), but I am against forcing it on everyone.

I DO NOT consider people who use my artwork for desktops, learning or anything else, as thieves as I've stated in other threads. I am actually quite honored that they would like it enough to keep it and have offered wallpaper in my gallery at times or made sure the size was right for such paper. I put up artwork to share. As long as my signature stays on it, I'm pretty happy, but if it doesn't, then it's my responsibility and decision on how I would deal with that. If I was truly worried, I wouldn't post at all. I would print them and have a private gallery or website that I could control the distribution via a java solution or some other watermarking system.

Tammy, I have the greatest respect for the administration of Rosity, but I just can't buy the "It's too hard" argument. Having been a programmer practically all my teen and adult life, and a professional internet developer for many years including quite a bit of use of mySQL and HTML, I can't understand how it would be too difficult to offer this as an artist option (or better yet, a picture by picture option). Obviously the pages are served by databases and coding which can make branching decisions, so I'm unclear how adding a flag, like the nudity flag, would be so difficult. True, it's harder then just sticking some HTML in the code template, but really, is it worth alienating lots of folks to save a bit of programming? I wouldn't think so, but then I'm not a mod...

As I said, in lieu of a Yes, and Optional, I'd have to vote No. It's not that I don't support the theory or the artist's right to protection if they so desire it, just the method on which it is thrust upon all of us.

Interestingly enough, Epilogue, which is filled with high quality artwork, has not had to take this approach, either because it was deemed to offer no protection, or they don't feel that it's a necessary step. I don't think cgtalk does this either.

I'd much rather have it an option from now on. Maybe even for individual images. Say you have a really really great image you don't want stolen, you can apply the block. If you have lower quality images you don't mind if people save them or whatever, then leave it off for those. Is it possible to change it so that people who aren't members of 'Rosity can still right-click? That would force minor theives to register, or leave. And once they register, it would be easier to indentify them if theft because (probably) their IP would be on file in the 'Rosity databases. Or am i just being an idiot? I find it horrifying that the 'Rosity community is being punished because there are slimeballs out there.

Though the coding itself might not be so bad, you also have to think of the other end...anything extra added to the sometimes sluggish execution really isn't desirable.

My understanding from our programmers is that it would be too difficult to implement the restrictions on permissions only. We are finding that we are currently having some problems with different browsers on this now. I am sorry I can't speak to the details since I am not a programmer. tammy

electroglyph:Hey, electroglyph@yahoo is the account I set up just for renderosity. It's the only account I use and the only name I log in under. I've switched from bellsouth to comcast to knowlogy at home. I wanted an email for my products that could stay static so customers could reach me and I could log into when I went out of state. My home ISP is tied to my phone or cable and at least one was not set up for remote dialup. I also got tired of netcom folding into mindspring folding into earthlink and having to change. Yahoo has stayed put for years, and people do pay for yahoo accounts too. Well I am sure you can see the problem with yahoo and other third party emails. You can stay completely anonymous if that is what you choose to do and use what ever excuse you want to justify it. However, this is the base of the problem if a cheat and a thieve can go into your house and steal under an alias ID the threat of being caught is totally eliminated. So, although your response may sound justifiable it only adds to this increasing problem.

Well, I just placed my vote, and am glad to see that commonsesne is prevailing by a large majority! I hate sites that play around with my browser and change its normal functionality, however laudable the excuse. This change is a pointless minor inconvenience - and not just to the "thieves" (and if you consider downloading an image to my hard disk for further study or use as a wallpaper you can count me among them - though I don't consider that in any way theft and am perfectly happy for anyone to do likewise with any of my images without seeking my permission). All this measure will achieve is to irritate a large number of members while preventing no-one with an ounce of computer knowledge from continuing to take what they wish for whatever purpose. And sorry, odeathoflife, but your "almost foolpoof" method hardly needs rocket science to subvert - it is just as vulnerable to any screen capture utility as any other method of "protection". This is simplicity itself for anyone to implement, needing no knowledge of Java, caching or any other arcana. Anyone with an editor like Paint Shop Pro will already have the necessary tool, and those without can easily download one for free. I seriously believe there are only two effective methods of protection: One is to place a damn big visible watermark across the image, of such size and boldness that it would be very tedious and difficult to edit out with a graphics program. (And the day that form of grafitti becomes common practice will be the day I stop visiting the forum!) The other method is don't post.

Madmax Br5 said it all in #82 where he stated: "If people are concered about stealing, they may take their own steps to prevent it. They make a choice to post their images here, and they agreed to the TOS here: "Renderosity provides a variety of communication services to members. These include: forums, gallaries, chat rooms, message boards, and instant messaging. Any information provided by members using these services is considered public information and is logged. Renderosity has access to these communications and will review them if needed. Renderosity will not be held responsible and/or liable for information that members choose to share via these services. We strongly recommend that members exercise forethought and caution prior to disclosing any personal information while using these services." " Incarnadine in #59 said..."I give my work away. It is my pleasure to see it enjoyed." and in #10 he said "I make my images for the purpose of the joy I experience creating them and the fact that others like them enough to use them as wallpaper (and I know that they do) is purely an added bonus to me. " By our own free choice we post our work here. We know what chances we take when we do post our work. I am no Picasso by any means. I do this for fun and because I love art. I would be flattered if someone wanted something I did for their wallpaper. But I think that there is no need to do this disabling of the rt click. Renderosity is not responsible if one of our images shows up somewhere else and has someone else claiming to be the artist. That is our own responsibility. It is up to us to persue it ourselves. If a thief steals my neighbors car, am I responsible to get it back for my neighbor because I live on the same block as he does? I think not. I also think that we cannot hold Renderosity responsible for stolen art work if that is what you choose to call it. You posted it. You took the chances. You suffer the consequences, and persue the theif. Personally, I don't care if someone wants to download an image I did. It just says that someone likes what I have done. That is satisfaction enough for me. 8)

I guess to stop theft, if that is what one chooses to call it, then the only sure fire way to stop it is to not post your images here at Renderosity.

rds, You're a merchant just like me. Rosity has your name address, phone, SSN when you gave them the information to sell your product and mail you the checks. How am I anonymous user?

I think this is one of the most customer-unfriendly things you could possibly do! All you are going to achieve is REDUCING the viewings of people's images.

Consider MY case:
_ I'm home recovering from an injury, so I have LOTS of time;

• I have a notebook by my bed, so I have constant access;
• I have broadband, so my connection is always fast.

So I should be the PERFECT Renderosity-gallery-surfer. Yet, even -I- don't have time to review all the postings in the galleries; so I skim the thumbnails, right-clicking on the ones that look interesting, then continuing on to subsequent thumbnail pages while I wait for the full-sized ones to load. Then, like leatherguy and others, I'll go back and review the full-sized images. I find that, by this method, I can keep on top of daily gallery postings - barely! (which is also why I almost never hang out here in the forums!)

But today, when I realized that right-clicking had been disabled, and sitting through just a few "click-wait-wait-wait-view-clickBACK-wait-wait-ReturnToGallery" cycles, I thought "to HELL with this!", and became even more selective in the images I chose to view. I probably looked at about 25% of the images I would normally view. Might well have missed some real gems, but...

So, if this continues, I simply won't bother to look at as many images. Is that really what you were trying to accomplish? A determined thief will find a way to get the image... but by alienating the majority of viewers, you're using a shotgun to shoot the mosquito among the butterflies!

Congrats to the Mods for trying this. not an effective option but thanks you for thinking of us! My suggestion is to those posting. Save your images to no more quality than is absolutely needed to show your talant. Keep size to a minimum. Make your image small enough on screen so that its not practical for someone to steal it. That will go farther than anything the mods can do. They can impliment tons of coding protocals and if someone REALLY wants it, they will get it. Making it inconvienent is only going to stop the lazy theives. No matter how much we complain or explain how this may or may not work, the mods are working FOR US and trying to help resolve the issue. For that they should be applauded. Thank you. Magick Michael

Wellllll... Using my stuff for profit without kick backs(90%)I call that stealing and giving me less is definitely stealing,So I am all divided on this...I feel that as a community it needs to be the Artists choice if they want to disable this function(Set the default to enable right click)so be it I know I more then likely wont on most but on some I might because of issues with a client or such,But I didnt think of the right click option to view the Galleries and have been going thru upto fifteen pages nightly and boy I just seem to not have the time to head to the forums...Just a question tho and this is to the higher ups in renderosity.... Would RENDEROSITY back the Artists on a full blown lawsuit...Say we nail a site for stealing Hundreds of Pictures and Have made some serious cash from our Hard work we find oot and start raising a Ruckus and say we decided action needed to be taken woul Renderositys Lawyers stand up and take the Offending Site to court....???

Wow...I need to slow dowwwwwnnnnn when typing...Wool=would oot=out and>they

I would not expect renderosity to provide any assistance except to back me up in terms of posting dates and general corroboration. The only time they would have a responsibilty would be when the offenderis a member and the offence is here in another gallery. (Std IANAL disclaimer here!)

I like this very much but everyone who know Micrcosoft and Windows know there is a Folder called Temporary Internet Files and every site I visit will be stored there. To disable the right mouse cklick doesn't help alot

I forgot to mention that you have to write a script in php that allows you to see the images online but it disabled the download to the Temporary Internet files. Only this way can help for image thiefs