Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=381306&Start=1&Artist=Turtle&ByArtist=Yes

I hope this is alright to post here if not= Forum Moderators: Lyrra, kbennett, ladynimue Just remove it. Heres the link to my post in the gallery last night. http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=381306&Start=1&Artist=Turtle&ByArtist=Yes I have it that they are stealing A LOT of different Peoples art work, What should we do???? Leah

Love is Grandchildren.

Just curious...what is a Tub? Evo

It's actually spelled "tube."

Err, "tubs" prolly equals "Tubes" A Photoshop Tube can be a way of (IMHO) pretending you're artistic without actually having the ability... it's also a way of stealing others' images. It's like making a stamp out of some element of an image, and reproducing it in another image. You can use it to make collages or other compositions that were nothing like the original. Personally, I find it sucky that Adobe, a company who usually goes out of their way to insure no one steals their software, ironically facilitates art theft with tools that (again, IMHO) have dubious use to a legitimate artist. OTOH, theives love Tubes... and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why. PS: Turtle - name the bastards; they weren't nice to you, why be nice to them? /P

It's not just Photoshop, though we like to pretend that's the only 2D program out there. Paint Shop Pro also utilized tubes, and so do other programs. Some people who use tubes can be somewhat oblivious to copyright issues about graphics in their quest to create greetings cards, stationary, etc.

I think she meant, "Tube". In PaintShopPro, they are called "tubes", in PhotoImpact they are called "Stamps" and In Painter they are called "nozzles". They are images, saved on a transparent background, converted to a tube, where you can load up your tube-tool, and create repeditive images of the same image with just one click. Genny

Just to add on to Genny's more complete answer, tubes also are used to take advantage of the layer function in 2D programs so that these small graphics can be moved around and positioned on a larger graphic with some ease. I don't think the intend of the creators of this software was to promote piracy, but rather to give artists an additional way to create interesting special effects.

That should be "intent," not "intend." Sigh.

Ah, I see...

Adobe didn't really have anythign to do with tubes, Alien Skin allows them to be used via their Splat filter though

Well if you have a legitamite complaint ( Not saying you do not ) I would be happy to email Yahoo and the ofending persons isp with a complaint as well. I am sure there are lots of people here that would add there voice ( email ) . If a bunch of us complained to Yahoo I am sure something more would be done than if you just tried to do it on your own.

I didn't even know photoshop did "tubes". Interesting. They aren't completely useless except to theives though, I used to tube my digital flower paintings. Came in quite useful.

...... Kendra

A bigger problem would be that the files are already in distribution, and if an person innocently picked a tube up, and used it in their composition, not realizing that it wasn't legal, what do you do then?

The actual intended benefit of a tube is once an image has been created by the original artist, that the image can be replaced, resized, repositioned, etc. A lot of time savings more than anything else. The problem is that most tubes are 2D. That's where we as 3D artists come in. For instance, some of the pinups on white are very easy for tubers to steal, or other items on plain backgrounds. The more complicated a poser render is, the harder it is for them to use. Royo is a great example of an artist that has been tubed to death. Disney, Geddes, all of them are held hostage by theives. It's an offhanded compliment to those of us that have had our work used, but it's also illegal. Leah has only given one person authority to use her work in this manner, so anyone else using her work is committing copyright infringement. Even the use of our work in websets is starting to occur more and more frequently.

Tasquah...Leah has a statement from one of the offenders admitting cupability. And the first response, "I didn't know". When someone first enters the galleries, there is a statement that the artwork remains the property of the artists or something to that effect. I would suggest that a one line statement below the comment box stating, "This image is copyrighted to the artist, do not use without written permission of the artist."

dampeoples I would hazard a guess that over 70% of all the tubes i ever saw were copyright violations. Most tubers just surf the net downloading everything they can get there hands on. Some have found renderosity a good place to fill up on photo's. We make it pretty easy for them by uploading fairly high rez images of there favorite items. Not to mention easy to mask with little or no back grounds. The irony that i find most amuseing is when tubers have a tizzy fit when some one else steals there work and posts it as there own . Especially when its a copyrighted work .

Tubs are shortened form of the word Tubes....which is a Paint Shop Pro funtion of saving an image without a background so you can use it repeatedly...It has nothing to do with Adobe. JASC, the creators of the Paint Shop Pro program, as the creators of other paint programs, don't make this function to help people steal graphics.... People steal graphics because they want to. They take an image and cut out the part they want and save it as a tube so they can drop it on any image they want with just one click. It's a great function of the program. However, some people use it to steal and pass around their stolen goods. Unfortunately there are a ton of Yahoo groups who do this and pass them around thru the email groups...it has been going on for years and not only are Poser artists stolen from but everyone from novices to the Masters are too. You can't stop it...the best you can do is put a mark on your images so they won't want them....

tasquah, yeah, i figured the number would be pretty high. I, too think that the thief mentality is screwy. I joined a forum once before reading it for a few days, they had several polls concerning the legalities of their software, 90% stole theirs, and another poll concerning if they had been ripped off or not, about 70% of them had been ripped off. how ironic.

I didn't know PSP had 'em as well... I guess I just got mad along with Turtle, esp. since it's pretty tough to make something pretty, but then to sit back and watch some moron run off with it? Ugh. /P

dampeoples - one thing that can be done is to request of the Yahoo Group moderators and each of these little groups does have a mod start a not to use artist list as a start. The other thing to do is to go to Yahoo of course and have the group disbanded. With enough complaints this is a situation that they have to deal with.

I'd just like to say don't get mad at the software companies for including this function in "paint" programs. There are some very legitimate wonderful uses for tubes. And honestly, with a little time I could do the same thing with any gallery picture and use it anywhere else without much problem even without the tube function. The problem with people that do steal work and make it into tubes is a lot of them don't understand it's theft. I was in that category when I very first started using paint shop pro. But as I was around longer and started reading more websites, I learned. I'm not saying all of them are innocent... but don't blame the software. ;)

I'm in the same boat as Chailynne. When I first started, and people shared tubes, I didn't know I was infringing on anyone's rights because, frankly, people don't announce that they were sharing stolen goods. I had to quit Paint Shop Pro forums, as much as I love the program, when I realized that people weren't asking permission to use graphics, photographics, etc. to create their own graphics, greetings cards, websites, stationary, etc. That's really why I started with Poser...I wanted to have art available to me that I wouldn't have to take from somewhere else. Okay, you can all stop laughing hysterically now. But at least when I use someone's textures or models now, it is with the permission of the creator. That's why I try to faithfully acknowledge where I get items for my graphics...I know the true artists are the ones who create what I use....certainly not me. Another subject and another hobby horse. Oh well.

Got Tubes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GotTubes/ Cute Tubes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cute-Tubes-4-U/ Heres Where the Two groups are that pass around our stuff. My next post will be an e-mail. That tells excealty there mind frame.

Love is Grandchildren.

Heres the Letter I got_email just so you would know. Leah, I thought you might want to read this, this is how bad it is in the tube groups and it is really bad for those who don't share their tubes... I have more letters from this group if this one isn't enough proof of the fraud that is out there... ----- Original Message ----- From: Brandy h Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 3:14 AM Subject: Your Tubes:) I am writing you to announce that a group has been formed. We have over 250 members. The focus and purpose of our group is to collect all the tubes we can, especially from people like you, who say do not pass on to other groups. We collect them, rename them, watermark them and share them on the groups as our own. We have infiltrated all of the groups under many different names. NOONES tubes will be missed!! The Tubed Avengers

Love is Grandchildren.

That reaches a new low in piracy. It's bad enough to be a thief...worst, somehow, to boast about it and encourage other people to do it. Doesn't say much for these people or their integrity, other than that they lack any.

" That's really why I started with Poser...I wanted to have art available to me that I wouldn't have to take from somewhere else." I for one am not laughing: this is exactly why I started with Poser, too. I needed lots of illustrations for my courseware, and didn't want to go through all the time, trouble and cost of using figures from books. This is one (maybe even the main?) benefit of copyrights: when properly enforced, they encourage more creativity and less laziness.

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

If that is the case, you can get the home ISP information from Yahoo - to find out where this turd's DSL/Cable/dial-up line is. Then you pass that along to them, along with Yahoo's records... they get an expensive kick in the arse (getting a new ISP if they use DSL or Cable would suck), and with a little diligence, there is nowhere for them to post their "tubes" without having to pay for the bandwidth to do it ...and I'm evil enough to set up a perl-based bandwidth sucker (on an OC-12 line) that will positively kill off any kiddie pirate's basic colo site in less than 24 hours >:D /P

Godd for you Penguinisto! Sometimes money is the only thing that will make these morons listen. How lame some folks are. Marque

ockham...I thought people might laugh, not because of my motives, but because my results aren't exactly artistic. ;)

We all have to start somewhere dialyn....check out my early work in my gallery.......badddddd stuff in there!

Yeah, well I think I've hit a plateau. But it's okay. It's better than I would have done without it. I just think it is very sad that there seems to be always someone around to poison the waters. Such is life.

"I'm in the same boat as Chailynne. When I first started, and people shared tubes, I didn't know I was infringing on anyone's rights because, frankly, people don't announce that they were sharing stolen goods. "

Same here dialyn. I did the tube thing as well and when I realized it, quit some groups too. I'd say those who simply use tubes can be educated about why it's wrong. It's the ones who actually do the chopping up of images that likely know what they're doing is wrong. I know one of the first tube sites I found pretty mcuh made it look as if the images were her creation.

There are some groups out there that share and create legit tubes though. There are some beautiful mouse drawn tubes and if anyone knows of Stephanie, who writes books on PhotoImpact, you'll know what I mean. Her work is beautiful. And these artists get stolen from as well.

...... Kendra

My suggestion is to join these groups and see what sort of stuff is going through them. When we see who, and not all of them do, is the one that is doing the thefts, then we have better documentation with which to assault their ISP's with.

I wonder, in a rare moment of optimism, if there isn't a growth pattern in all of this. A lot of us seem to have started out in the same place, and maybe as you grow to want to do more challenging and original graphics, you eventually feel less need to borrow (euphemistically speaking) someone else's art or style. I am not suggesting this is an excuse for piracy. But when one begins, one does imitate other people, or tries to replicate in whatever way one can what one admires. And then, given time and some stubbornness, one can reach beyond those limits and start, humbly in my case, to become a little more original in one's approach. But that's not a justification for theft. Simply a speculation on the learning curve.

"...have dubious use to a legitimate artist." The capability of a program to 'stamp' down images goes back a very long ways. Painter's nozzles were basically the first on the PC and Mac, though the Amiga had them even earlier. The uses are many for a legitimate artist! Simply because they have been abused does not mean the tool is useless.

Many folks are just plain bad, but I agree that many get roped in in the beginning because they don't know that the tubes they use have been stolen. Yahoo have as part of their TOS that they won't accept deception or copyright infringement in email or groups, so I think if you wrote to them and gave them the details they would close these groups down. Best of luck. Catlin

I agree, whole-heartedly, with Dialyn. I think that most people really don't Know? I got my first computer when I was 45 years old!!! Growing up in my generation, I didn't even trust an electronic calculator.....I would re-check it after it did it's thing, just to make sure it was right! LOL! I began with PaintShopPro5, and it has carried me here. I never did tubes to re-distribute, or anything else for that matter. I just did what ever I did, for "fun". I left those groups because I felt there was a lot of "Jelousy" and pettiness there, and after seeing the tubes, I knew there was "NO WAY IN HELL" that they actually drew those pictures by themselves. I guess, what I really what to say is.........I think, that many of those folks........REALLY DON"T KNOW IT IS WRONG.........now....maybe, WE, should take the time to tell them. (: In a nice way, of course. LOL! Genny

There was a discussion in another message regarding the lifting of entire images and being used by others to create websets. A LOT OF RENDEROSITY artists imagery is at the following web addresses: http://ladiosadelmar.cjb.net http://desingbyeladiosadelmar.cjb.net http://ladyutopia.com Now, some may have given permission, but others have not...and the sites are in Spanish with popup hell. I still hadn't been able to get some of my stuff removed as of yesterday.

Attached Link: http://www.alchemedia.com/applications/websites.html

There actually is a technical solution to the image theft problem, Mirage from Alchemedia, but it's one of those if they don't list the price, you know it's probably too expensive for mere mortals.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

I also noticed that when I visit a website, all the graphics are downloaded on my pc harddrive for free (internet cache).

Attached Link: http://www.rightsforartists.com

Yes, it's not so much that the graphics are downloaded to a pc, because that is a cache situation, and one that can be addressed if the html code is set up correctly. What is a problem is when the imagery is being copied for use, modified and then sold as an original webset by someone else other than the original artist or someone making a tube from artwork which is Turtle's case and then claiming the tube original as their own.

d4500...that doesn't give you the right to use the graphics somewhere besides your cache! I don't buy, the "they don't know theory"...weren't we all taught as children, if it's not yours then it's stealing... I like the one where when I find my website graphics on someone else's website and I confront them, they say, "I didn't know, my child got the graphics and said here Mommy, use these"...I can't yell ya how many times I've heard that one...LOLOL..yeah right....first they take my website graphics and then they insult my intelligence.

Actually I tried to let people know that a lot of artwork was being "borrowed" to be used in stationary particularly incredimail stuff. The often put disclaimers that they get the stuff somewhere on the net; there is some effort on the part of some to educate people on copyright but mostly people want to decorate their email with images. The tubes are only part of it, yahoo hosts many incredimail groups that require people to post to remain in the group. Because they are worried about violations of copyright and the ability to trace to the violator lots of times the images are altered, masked and changed so the author's name is not visible. It is a way to get artwork circulated far and wide, but not even good for publicity sake if the artist's name is removed. I guess one way of looking at it is that the people are loving your work, the other is that they are stealing and cutting apart your work unfairly. These are people who spend their time generating stationaries, tags and stuff and they are looking everywhere for images to use. They mask, twiddle and share their creations and their modifications of others creations. Lots of the people do put credits on artwork so maybe one possibility is to set aside a few images that might be used with permission. the group members cross post so these guys are creating quite a volume of stuff.... You can search Yahoo groups for "incredimail" that is a real booming group who do use stuff quite a bit...I have seen work from many artists from here....

i've mentioned this ALOT...in the past, these same "sharing list" folks are voting each other consistently into our hot20. but, heyas.....we know a 6 month user of poser can be so brilliant as to be running neck and neck with our own artist of the year, right????? can't happen. not only that.....all of you folks who don't enjoy warez hitting your own pockets...listen up....one person out of 300 can buy a program....or get it through a p2p server....and share it with the rest of the "list". why is it so shocking that something of YOURS may be used for a little tag list birthday greeting? why do you ignore the whole "list" mentality, here? pop...pop...Poppi

Kind of lumping us altogether, aren't you? I admit that when I started, I no doubt used artwork without permission. Once I learned that the groups had no right to share the graphics, I dropped the groups and took the artwork off my website. I don't use warez programs...I buy from respected vendors. I also don't solicit people so I get voted into the Hot 20 (and I don't get there and that's fine because that's no where I belong for many reasons). I think the artists here have every right to be concerned when they have created something and see someone ripping them off without permission. I don't think it is right to assume everyone does it. Not everyone does. And some of us have learned better. I don't appreciate being dumped into a pit of misuse. I'm very careful to acknowledge everyone who contributes to one of my graphics and, if I fail to, I have no problem having that pointed out to me. I don't pretend I'm doing original art, but what I use is used with the express permission of those from whom I get it. So give us a break here.

but, if you vote for someone who has their lists voting them in....you are condoning it, and, you are condoning the whole process. so, give me a break, here. if it is wrong....it is wrong across the board.

I'm very insulted at what you are implying. I make up my own mind who I vote for. Who else votes for that person is irrelevant to me.

For some there is black and white and never any grey.

if it is black and white, that it is wrong to steal original creations, and, programs....we all agree on that, yes???? then, why should having the same folks how do this vote their list buddies into the 20 consistently? that is just another way of cheating us. but, to the stay at homes, list leaders and their ilk weild alot of power. and, methinks, there are many here, who "get out" in the world, by logging onto r'osity.

I think this is wandering so far off the original topic that I have lost interest in the discussion. I'm off this thread. Take care all.

I think Poppi is feeling neglected, and he/she thinks that being in the top 20 really means/makes a difference in life?Personally, I don't give a rat's ass, if I ever make the top 20........I do this for my OWN personal pleasure, I don't intend to EVER try and do this for a living, and the day that I don't have fun doing this........is the DAY I will STOP! I too, am insulted, that he/she should think I would vote for anyone because of "some" list? When and If I vote for anything........it is because, I have veiwed each and everyone of the images..........and I choose because that is the one I liked the best. Genny

genny, you just are not getting it. you vote for the same reasons i do...yes, i vote. but, if someone tells 15 or 20 friends from a "list" to drop by and vote....well, heyas...they can beat the "artist of the year" in the 20. corruption is corruption. i do this for a living....well, mainly ads. before all of the new folks came to this site, most of us, who posted, here "did this for a living". sorry, if i am just a dinosaur from the old days when this site was folks trying to earn a buck from 3d. it is so much more swell, now,with tubers, rigged contests, and, what have you. if it is acceptable to the masses, why should i query it.... ANTON...lissen up....that's how you make folks angry, as well.

Poppi...right now I'm a stay at home because I lost my job recently to a company reorganization, in fact 4000 others in my company had the same thing happen to them. When I'm not out looking for another job, or sending resumes, I'm doing something not only creative but also fun like genny says. In fact, I've started to develop some textures for clothing items, to help supplement my Poser appetite and to downright make a little extra income. Not as to the Hot 20, that's been in contention about once a month...it's not going to change. However, I know of several lists whose members do vote for others to have them make the Top20. Some are well deserved, some are IMHO not, but it's small stuff, and I've learned not to sweat the small stuff, and besides it's nothing I can change, so quite frankly unless somebody even told me that I was in the Poser Hot 20 I wouldn't know it. I don't even go there anymore. I look at the thumbnails, and comment on those that intrigue me or grab me in some way to warrant a further look.

Forgive me, Poppi.......but I really don't think, or feel that being in the top 20 has anything to do with this thread? I don't know who does or does not do this for a living......as........I never had that opportunity given to me when I was growing up....Yes.......get into computers...that is the way of the future..........HA!....that my friend........was not heard of when I was a kid! Kudos to those of you who have done this, and I will gladly purchase your items when my heart desires.......but that is because I have worked many years doing a job that I used to love, but because of economic times.......it is now a chore. My only solice is, that I have the money.....and if I want it, I can have it.....but it really has nothing to do with the person ever being in the top "20" .......that is what you need to see. (: I, as a person who may buy your goods, only buys it because that is what I am looking for........not because you made the top 20, To be quite honest.....I don't even visit the galleries everyday, so I really do miss alot. (: Genny

Poppi, I understand what you're saying. I just don't know if there's really anything to be done about it. And people may not realize what you're refering to with the H20 and the list. That did come up several months ago so there may be some confusion goin on here.

...... Kendra

I'm with you dialyn...now it's a H20 debate....

This has wandered away from the orginal point. The orginal post, has served it's purpose and thank you all for your support. And the Very Fact some people sure missed was I was told, there is A-LOT OF our ARTIST here stuff being Passed around in these groups. I'm suppose to get some more pictures and I will open a new post and put them up. If thats ok with the Mods. Can we somehow stop right click copy from our Posts???

Love is Grandchildren.

That would be Great, Turtle..........I apologize for going off the subject as I think your original post was very valid and I am sure more artists are unaware of whats happening. Take care and happy holiday. Genny

Turtle, I think there is something that can be done with the code for a web site that stops the right click option but I don't know enough about web design to give you details. I just know it is possible 'cos that's what my partner did on our web site. Catlin

It's not so much stopping the theft on individual websites, but theft here from our images at Renderosity.

Thats a pretty good idea catlin_mc except its pretty easy to get around that . One way is to drop and drag the photo into a browser and the new 6.0 internet explorer now pops up a doohicky in the uper left corner ( Looks like a mini tool bar ) that lets you save anyways reguardless of the codeing it only disables the right click save.

And if there was a way to even disable that, you'd have to consider that some folks are clever enough to use the screen capture abilities of their 2D program. The best you could do is make a tube of your own (a logo of some sorts) that you could use to watermark your images. Fight fire with fire.

---

Barbequed Pixels?

Your friendly neighborhood Wings3D nut.
Also feel free to browse my freebies at ShareCG.
There might be something worth downloading.

actually, if we were allowed to upload in a format that supports layers...psd, for example....well, we could all put a transparent layer over our images, if we wanted to. i do believe...correct me if i am wrong...that in that format, right clicking on a pic would only save the top layer.

Poppi that is a great idea, I think you are right on this and it is such a simple way of doing it. It is just unfortunate that jpg won't keep the layers since that is the most used format. Catlin

The main problem with that format is that it would not be compressed, and of course the file sizes would be 10 times what they are now. But an great idea!

PSD wouldn't show in a browser, it would have to be downloaded and viewed in another program.

Attached Link: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/~lcushing/pdfs/ImagePro.pdf

I don't think there is an easy way to prevent a graphic from being stolen is not to post it. I have a one line Javascript that will re-enable right-click on pages that have it disabled. There are utilities that will chop an image up and assemble them to look like a single image but that can be circumvented as well. The only (seemingly) workable solution I've seen is a product like the Mirage I mentioned earlier which uses a complicated encryption scheme. Even technology like digital watermarking would probably not be applicable when the image is going to be sliced up for tubes. The thrust of DRM security seems to be understandably aimed at protecting music and video data. You can reduce the resolution of an image to make it less attractive, display it as greyscale or place an obtrusive watermark on it but none of those is really desirable if your purpose is to show of the image in the first place. I've read that you can place a transparent HTML layer over a page which is somewhat akin to using the PSD layer but that to can be gotten around. Perhaps there's some other technique, but I haven't seen it. Beyond that, screen capture, searching the cache or some other method can be used to retrieve the image. The best that you can probably do for free is to try to make it inconvenient enough to discourage the casual image thief. reference: Protection of Digital Images on the Web

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken

There's really no way to stop the truly determined jerks. Protection methods are... well, isn't there a saying that locks are to keep honest people honest? This is the first time in US history that the average citizen is coming up against copyright law, and if the lawyers and courts don't understand it completely, you can bet that they don't. I see everything from authors who have a fit if you actually MAKE something from the book of craft patterns they sell, to people like these tubers (potatoheads? slaps self sorry) who think anything that isn't nailed down and on fire is fair game. And before I go too far off into tangentland, my point ultimately is that you have the people who don't know and the people who don't care. You're going to be hard pressed to stop the people who don't care. Right-click disabling, transparent overlays, mouse-overs, slicing images; they know the ways around them. Those methods only really stop the people who don't know, the ones who go "ooh, pretty" and right-click save without realizing that it is a copyright violation. And each method will probably stop them that one time, but wouldn't it be better to educate them to stop them always? All rightie, I know that was a long way to walk for my suggestion. Anyway, my suggestion is that instead of or at least in addition to using those other methods, on the top of your webpage (unfortunately this isn't as practical in the galleries), put a link to one of the good non-accusatory "what is copyright?" sites and put a little blurb along the lines of: "Please do not save images off of my site. I have had problems with people taking them, turning parts of them into PSP tubes, and passing them on. Even if they aren't making money off of it, it is still against the law; they don't have to make a profit to violate my copyright. It isn't fair use; fair use in legal terms means a critique or analysis of my image, and nothing else. For more information on copyright, please see the above link. Please help me share my work without being stolen from."

oh please......I put all that stuff on all my site pages and when my front page was on someone else's page, I still got the "my daughter took them and gave them to me" crap.... I feel like saying to them, Oh, so you not only don't teach your kids NOT to steal but show them how to use what they've stolen, right?"

puts hands up Sorry. Just wanted to give people the benefit of a doubt. My mistake.

FyreSpiryt, I agree with you 100%. It's not much solace to those who feel they are being ripped off but the reality of the situation still has to be faced. Given the absence of an affordable technical solution and the impracticality of a legal one for most people, the only sure-fire remedy is to simply not to display their images. The seductive ease with which images can be copied mis only part of the problem. I think there is a sense, perhaps unconscious, that anything displayed on one's computer screen is fair game. Most people wouldn't think twice about copying a soap opera and giving it to a friend. True, the issues may not be the same but I think the attitudes are similar. As you point out, copyright is not something most people have dealt with, though I'm not sure more education would necessarily help. Simply put, I think perhaps many people are acting from what they perceive as a moral rather than a legal standpoint and they don't see the harm in taking a piece of an image and using it. They don't see any financial harm being done and Lord knows this is a society where money rules. I t may sound crazy but maybe putting a PayPal link on your page and setting a price for an image (in addition to some other measures like right-click prevention) might actually discourage a few people since they'd feel like they were really stealing. In the end, appealing to people's sense of fairness and responsibility is perhaps the only immediate answer. No, it will not stop every image thief, but nothing else is likely to do so either. It is far from a perfect solution but rejecting it out of hand is no solution at all.

"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H. L. Mencken