I use the right click on rosity galleries to open the image in a new window. I dislike it opening in the same window. Just a quirk.

(,,,)As we stated before, we did disable it and it was not well received by many many legit members and it didn't stop the image ripping so I don't know(...)
**StaceyG

**But seems that in RuntimeDNA doenst have this problem -they allow to disable the download.
Doenst work here because of the php software that Miss Nancy mention?

Quote - I think EVERYONE will agree that there is NO 100% way to stop this.....You have been heard countless times....we agree!
But what I don't understand is why everybody is objecting to implementation of even the most BASIC measures.

I will now do as hawkfyr would say...."now pulls up comfy chair......"

who's objecting..i agree with you gradient. and the person responsible for the implimentation of those basic methods is us the people who post the image. we can all do what you ask rendo to do and those that can't can ask for help. for water makrs all we need is a program that has layers. i'm sure theyr'e some open source ones out there. if someone wants me to i'll even do the google for them and show the url. they then create a little pic or their name or an url. trun down the transparency and copy and poste it to their image. if they can do a thumbnails they can resize their pics tp small sizes so it's not as inviting as large pic. they can keep a record of the site or sites they posted it on. they can even link a small watermarked pic to a site they created and implement the right click there without having to get a rendo account, as of yet all thats been mentioned can and should be done by the individual members themselves all of it is possible to do so and should i show any image i thought some of these basic things would stop from being stolen i'd impliment them myself 

billy

Quote - -Disable the right click with a system that also dont allows to Capture. As happen to me in the place i mention when i wanted to download that sport and pretty lady. Nothing to do, either to print it, and a little window appear with a note: "Your right bottom doenst work in this place. Thanks"

Quote - try doing a screencap whilst playing a DVD.

You are making confusion about what  a software installed in your can computer can do and what can do a software running a site.
I can format my disk in any moment, can Renderosity format my disk?
I can turn off the power of my computer with only one finger, can Renderosity do the same with my computer?
Print-screen is a very primitive capture option that not always work (DirectX, CPU 100% use, etc), but in the case it works it cannot be disabled externaly to the computer.
The same with "right-click", who can disable the right-click is only the software installed in my computer and not you or any site.
If the software installed in my computer doesn't disable right-click, no matter what you do, right-click always will work in my computer, you have no control over my computer, only I have.
Nobody can defeat a simple fact, if you are able to see an image in the monitor, the image already exist in the computer, so it was downloaded no matter if you liked or not.
Once I am able to see an image in the monitor, I can turn off the internet conection, burn the moden, destroy all the cables and the image will continue to exist in the monitor screen.
A nuke can fall on the site hosting the image, destroy all the site and images, but the image will continue in my monitor screen and it will continue until I decide that I want to see another thing, even so the image will continue to exist in my disk and it will continue until my computer replace it with another thing.
Right-click, save as or any operation only move or copy the image from one folder in my disk to another folder and is nothing that you can do, I have the control of my computer and not you.

ricardo, I daresay it should be obvious that these people don't want to be told it's impossible to protect their images against theft. but I haven't really seen any innovative thinking along these lines yet, and el que nunca aventura, nunca gana el mar but I admit, it would be a total bummer of they were to accidentally nuke any of these ISPs :lol:

I am tired of the image protection, music protection, video protection, shit protection and all the paranoic people. Want to protect your image?, make a crap that nobody will want to download, put a huge copyright crossing all the picture or don't upload anything, but please don't create troubles or headaches to people that have nothing to do with this.
Take a look at Microsoft with their activation code, Windows Vista, RIAA and Hollywood with their DRM, Sony BMG with their CD with virus and so on. Have all of this stoped any piracy?, of course NOOOO, you can buy anything you want in any street's corner or download it for free in P2P.
Their paranoic and psicotic protection the only effect that had is to make the life of people that legally purchased their products a real inferno!!!
You buy, you pay and the headache is only yours and you live in Hell, meantime all the pirates have a life of pleasure in Heaven.
People use the right click for many uses, do you want to make a nighmare the navigation in the site for a lot of people disabling the right click???, nightmare for people that have nothing to do with dowloading files, for who downloads the images disabling or any other invention is useless, he will continue to do it without any problem.
Please, let normal people live in peace and stop inventing Infernos.

Really dont mind if you call me whatever  denomination you want, Sir. As well as you and  Miss Nancy, etc, dont have any obligation to reply nothing here, and less in spanish.
There are many people who doenst know about this question and i accept to post here this theme,  when i receive the propose of a person, knowing very well that i was going to have a bummer impression.
I didnt see nothing intelligent coming of the experts, except from billy423uk, and **SGT2005
**If theres a place in internet where explains all this questions, as suppose there is, or a book, etc.  is just enough. Maybe you think that i am here waiting all kind of explanations without moving a finger. Youre making prejudgements.

Please keep this thread about the original topic and lets not go down the personal attacks path. I don't want to lock this thread but we need to be civil and keep on topic.

For me is not a problem.And in the topic question, i can solve it by myself without asking nothing to anyone here, as i solve  my problems myself since i was 18. 
I am not worried, exactly, in this present moments. But is possible this question becomes worst, because the 'rippers' as they call them, are doing what they want with more and more technology and seems that in the other place, the sentence is always 'impossible'.
But personnally, i am not more than a 5% worried. I accept to write this thread, but more in the name of the people like me that we are not experts.
The question of this topic i can know it tomorrow or monday. Here, where i am, in Barcelona, at 2 streets where i live. Almost sure they are right and theres nothing to do.
For me, StaceG, you can Close this thread if you consider it raisonable, but thanx for your presence, as always.
And dont worry, because i am not interested in attack, even in insults. I will not follow them

"If a simple disable right click stops one ripper....that is one less ripper that people have to worry about."

No, just one less rip.

"Out of all these threads/posts....there have only been very few members that have offered ANY positive suggestions.  It's easy to sit back and criticize and be negative."

And easy to go for the ad hominem approach.  It's just being realistic, not negative. There are no effective tools, as has been shown.

"BTW, we will never stop speeders and murderers either....but things like radar, photo radar and police do make a difference in minimizing the infractions.  Why don't we just throw up our hands and get rid of  the laws and the police?.....we'll never stop crime 100%...."

There's a big flaw in such comparisons between theft of digital goods and theft of "material" (for want of a better term) goods, and real-world crime in general, which is that while the latter is a zero-sum affair, the former is not.  Obviously if you take one burglar off the streets, a number of people will retain goods they otherwise would have lost, so it's worth pursuing burglars even if the capture rate is small, since there is a clear and quantifiable benefit to individuals (and their insurance companies).

However, trying to stop digital theft by small, piecemeal efforts is pointless.  It's like trying to reduce the number of unwanted kittens in a population of cats by neutering tomcats.  You have to do virtually all of them or it isn't worth the bother, given typical feline promiscuity.

Unlike real-world goods, digital goods (like feral cats) can be propagated over and over, and redistributed accordingly.  There might be a brief feeling of triumph to be had when one copyright violator is caught at it, but that's about all; it ultimately makes absolutely no material difference to the situation.

Such practical ineffectiveness is recognised by governments, who are having to fall back on deterrence as a last (and only) resort in dealing with copyright piracy, by introducing the sort of maximum sentences that only murderers, armed robbers and rapists could have expected in the past.  This development raises awkward questions about our fundamental values of right and wrong, I think.

First at all world is not divided into good and evil, the war between God and Lucifer don't exist.
The concept of good and evil is relative, what is good for someone can be evil to other and what is evil can be good.
The same is about downloading images and before anything the subject must be divided in three big categories:
1- People that download pictures for personal use and personal colections.
2- People that download pictures and use them in sites or distribute them.
3- People that download and use it for some comercial profit.
You cannot treat all the people that download in the same way, each category has its own rules and the division between "good" and "evil" is very subjective.
Don't think that people that download for personal use consider themself as evil, most of them are good people, consider themself as good and the downloading act has nothing of wrong, people have rights too and their rights are not decided by your will.
If you can them thieves the roles become inverted and who is on the evil side is you and not them.!

Does anyone but me remember the VERY short period of time that rendo DID have a "no right click script" running?  It was...god, years ago.  It was shot down FAST, because it annoyed the hell out of those of us who use the right mouse button to navigate through the site, AND it slowed down the whole site in general. 
Putting the onus on Rendo to protect YOUR work is completely irresponsible and pretty illogical.  If you want your work protected from rippers, you have 2 choices.  Don't upload it, or watermark it.  Forcing a free-to-joiners website where you place your art on THEIR servers, virtually for free (you don't have to purchase from the marketplace to use the galleries), to protect your work is like expecting the security guard at the mall to arrest and jail a theif running out of your store.  The most they have ('round here, anyway) is a billy-club, and most of them are out of shape.  The most they can do is call the cops.

And, there's my 5cents.

*"rendo DID have a "no right click script"
*And even at that it still winds up in your temp file when you view it so you can scavange it out later, to flog a dead horse....

"...to protect your work is like expecting the security guard at the mall to arrest and jail a theif running out of your store..."  

LOL ,so true!
On both accounts.

Since it is possible to lock a flash movie, you could put a Flash wrapper round the image. The file will still end up on the hardrive but (the .SWF) file will be uneditable till the password is broken.

No matter what y do some one will figure a way to crack it so I take solace in the fact that anything that's stolen from me is at computer screen res of 72 dpi and is generally an 800x600 render which is totally impossible to print at anything like a readable/viewable size in a decent resolution.