Posted By: LoopysueFor myself I'm thinking of designing a very small wood mouse to sit in the bottom left hand corner - my own map-maker's mark, because I am already very widely known at the Guild and to some extent here as 'Mouse', since the idea of my mark actually enhancing the quality of the image rather than detracting from it seriously appeals to me. I just have to be careful that it doesn't look like the mark of a certain rather famous steam locomotive painter (ironically I can't remember his name off the top of my head) whom my dad very much admired, and who always used to hide a tiny mouse somewhere in his painting. He was so famous for it that people would glance at the painting and then almost immediately start looking for the mouse. I bet that was really where the original idea for 'Where's Wally' really came from - did we but know it!
That would be Terence Cuneo (1907-1996), I think (Wikipedia link; it has further links to sites with his work as well).
Now that I've seen all the stuff about him generally about the place online, I think I need to rethink my map makers mark idea - with respect to the fact that it would be a bit like stealing someone else's mark!
Well, there's always the computer mouse (an optical mouse somehow seems appropriate in this regard ). Or the never-completed super-heavy German tank from 1944 (Panzerkampfwagen VIII Maus), if you're wanting something to scare off copyright violators, perhaps...
Hmmmn.... Do you think a mouse holding a quill that curls around to nestle it into a circular shape would be too similar? That would reference both my Guild name and my writing/drawing (as opposed to just a mouse). I'd have to work really hard at it, though, or it will end up looking more like a squirrel with a bushy tail!
But wouldn't that make the mouse symbol as complex as the drawing it's protecting?! Plus maybe a bit too "Beatrix Potter"? What about a computer mouse "holding" a quill pen instead...
Oh no I'm definitely not the sugar sweet candy type when it comes to writing stuff (too many get injured and die for it to be a fairy tale), so that wouldn't do at all. I think I will stop hijacking Jim's thread for now, and go away and have a longer think about this.
Well, many long years about, about 1955, I asked my grandmother why she put her name on her paintings instead of using a cartouche like others did. She looked at me over her eyeglasses and pointed that without a name, how will anyone know who painted it ? A cartouche/symbol would require it to be common knowledge. So I'll use my name.
As for the size of it, I want it around that size so folks cannot pretend they didn't see it. And I have met, and do know 2 people, who do think that way. No name on it, it must be there's, and not the person's who made it or bought it.
Posted By: JimPHyperlinking from Pinterest or other such share sites is prohibited.
Sounds like a good idea.
Can anyone enlighten me what the point of this PInterest is? I thought it was just some kind of social bookmarking service? (I.e. useless to me), but their website is about as useful and informative as a parking ticket. Do they sell/steal/violate stuff too?
Say for example I was looking for a set of blinds for my office and found an image on Google that I rather liked. I click the image, but because its already been pinned to a Pinterest board I'm taken to Pinterest, and not the site that's actually selling the blinds. I can get to the vendor's site, but only by going through Pinterest. Doing so, however, means that I would have to create a Pinterest account for myself, because they have a forced logon policy. So you can't go around them, and you can't go through them without getting a nice bright yellow tag in your ear.
Well I don't want a nice bright yellow tag in my ear, metaphorical or not!
The whole thing is just a huge control point that's rapidly taking over the entire web as more and more images are collected without the owner's knowledge or permission - in most cases by people who have nothing better to do with their lives than make virtual notice boards of pretty pictures of outlandish cup cakes and impractical shoes.
When I first started noticing how regularly my research was being affected by this virtual brick wall dividing me from my source information about a month back, I didn't know what Pinterest was either, so I searched for information the regular way - by words rather than pictures. That was when I came across a blog that seems to no longer exist, in which a system of advertising income was described. Apparently Pinterest either had, or planned to have, a piece of software that tracks visitors through their site so that when I click the blinds I want to buy, and which I found by Google's image search engine, I am forced to go through Pinterest just to get to the vendor, and Pinterest then charge for advertising the blinds. It wasn't clear to me just how the money was to be acquired, or from who, but there were lots of shocked and outraged comments on that blog about how it was bold as brass daylight robbery, because ultimately the customer will end up paying - one way or another.
I bet they were quite keen to have that particular blog removed, and they must be making a lot of money somehow to have the power to get it removed when it was causing quite a deal of excitement.
I totally disagree with anyone linking to or 'borrowing' even a thumbnail of my images, but if this advertising lark is what Pinterest have in mind for the future, then I'm going to do all I can to avoid having any of my author's webpage maps pinned up there on those boards, because I'm probably going to be struggling hard enough to make money from my writing with all the tax and fluctuating sales, without Pinterest suddenly starting to make demands on me for advertising my books without my knowledge or consent.
Another view is this - that people who pin stuff rarely ever give proper credit to the artist, and can make up their own comment - taking whatever kudos they fancy for themselves. So not only is pinning stealing the image as far as I'm concerned, it gets a whole bunch of words on it that you never intended should ever be associated with it.
Other than that I'd have to create an account to give you any more details, and I'm just not going to do it.
So, to sum it up in one word: Evil. I mean, Facebook are definitely evil too, but at least there seem to be a benefit to use it (For a certain definition of benefit. In my case there are some, but it is minuscule, so I stay mostly away).
I did find a DMCA form on their site though, so I guess one could file those, US laws demand they respect those, right? But it sounds like the site would be a nightmare to navigate to identify such material. Sounds like a prime candidate for any blocklist.
Then again, if an image that shows up in a Google Images search is a Pinterest-pinned image from another site, it's almost guaranteed the image from that other site will also be on Google Images. The Pinterest-borne image may just appear earlier in the list (or matrix) of images due to some savvy search engine optimization (SEO) algorithm that Pinterest uses. You can usually see the site for the image by hovering your pointer over the image without clicking. No one is forced to use or go to Pinterest.
If you prefer, just avoid it entirely in a Google search. If you add -site:pinterest.com to your search terms then Google will not return any results from Pinterest. You can "chain" these if, for example, you want to search for maps but you don't want results from Pinterest or from Reddit, your search terms would look something like this: dungeon map -site:pinterest.com -site:reddit.com . Google will not include anything from Pinterest or Reddit in it's search results.
Alternatively, if you use the site:somesite.com filter without the minus sign (hyphen) then the search results will only include items found on the indicated site. Naturally, you would replace somesite.com with the actual website domain you want to include (or exclude if you precede "site:" with a hyphen).
Note: I don't believe you can "chain" more than one site when filtering FOR a site, probably because, while you may mean "site x OR site y", Google is probably trying to perform a logical AND, but that's just an educated guess.
That's extremely useful to know, since I'd rather not see pages and pages of things that I cannot have... if you see what I mean.
It also means that I can be more specific if I ever need to go chasing a map that I've been told has been pinned - without having to create an account. Presumably then I'd use Google and enter the search term with site:pinterest.com after it.
@ Remy - I didn't use the word 'evil', but that is what I meant.
I've seen them put up free wallpapers from other sites and require you to log in to just be abe to view the image. When i can just go to the wallpaer page and download the image for free.
They basically make you pay a few just to download or get the information to download a image and what is worse is that most image searches will go to there page I noticed with search pages and won't even show the original page they lifted the image from and make you go to Pinterest.
@ Jay_NOLA - like Dogtag says, you can type " -site:pinterest.com" after your search term to make sure you don't get any Pinterest images presented to you in the Google search, and the wallpapers will still be there - linked to the original site.
@ Jim - for the time being, no there isn't, but I'm still hoping that if enough of us refuse to create accounts, and constantly exclude Pinterest from our search results (as I plan to do from now on), they will eventually die a natural death when the next 'in thing' comes along. I'm hoping its just a fad.
I have decided to delete any unwatermarked items of my files and maps, as it is going to take me at least a month, and more likely 3 months, to get all of them waterwarked. I didn't want to start a rush of thievery on maps I haven't watermarked yet.
So there are very few maps on my sites at this time. I have kept up there the items, pdfs, etc. I am hosting for others.
I really have to say this here... another forum, I just wanted to mention what was going on. Some of the posters there started dissecting what I said, and didn't say.
So, I am now apparently confused as I don't have proof someone is selling my maps, therefore, it isn't happening. People astound me from time to time.
Posted By: JimPI really have to say this here... another forum, I just wanted to mention what was going on. Some of the posters there started dissecting what I said, and didn't say.
So, I am now apparently confused as I don't have proof someone is selling my maps, therefore, it isn't happening. People astound me from time to time.
I don't really understand what you mean? Are you saying that someone is trying to make you look bad for being concerned about the evidence you found?
Posted By: JimPI looked closer at my logs, and the 'Display' bit is in my 'pages not found' part of cpanel. So I'm putting my maps back on line.
And I really don't understand what that means at all! Sorry.
When I checked cpanel, admin of my domain, I looked in the '404 pages not found' part of my sites.
It shows the lines in my visitor logs i was bothered by, as links not found on my site.
So they aren't linking to sell, but looking for links that don't exist on my site.
So my, approximately, 2.12 gigabytes of pngs are back up on my sites.
As for not stopping people from selling my maps, I think I can stop them. It wouldn't be cheap, but it is a copyright violation.
To your first question, the folks on another forum, gamer, didn't try to explain anything to me. They just pointed out I was mistaken and there was nothing I could do to stop people from copying and selling my maps. I doubted their claim and I still do. Two people there stated that since I could provide no evidence of my stuff being sold, it wasn't being sold.
But thats a fallacy. Lack of evidence, doesn't mean lack of something going on. There are places out on the Internet where regular search engines don't go. So when the two complainers searched, them not finding anything was meaningless, but they decided it did have meaning.
Sound's like a case of people being argumentative just because they can, and the evidence you did find seems pretty fishy to me.
However, I agree with what you've done, and I hope whoever is messing around at whatever they really are doing, think twice before disturbing your things again!
Hmmn.... Just like that blog I found only once? But before I go and spark a ridiculous conspiracy theory I'll just sigh and carry on designing my mark, which I've decided will go right in the corner at the end of a small copyright notice:
(its meant to be a mouse paw print, but needs a bit more work! LOL!)
It also needs to be only about a quarter of that size. None of it will cover any significant part of the map (hopefully being placed in the ocean or a desert or some such relatively empty feature), but the lump caused by the presence of the mark will make it fairly difficult to simply trim the copyright notice off the edge of the map.
I think the general idea is to use something that doesn't detract from the map by being too big or colourful, but which takes a corner in such a way that someone would have to trim half the map away to get rid of it. (the only exception I've ever seen to this rule is Bogie's all seeing eye with its incredibly colourful and very well known design - but that's just Bogie all over, and he's famous enough for people to want a map just because it has his mark on it)
The mark isn't supposed to obscure any of the important bits or get in the way of other's enjoyment of the map.
In the next couple of days I'm going to be uploading the first update to Merelan City for a very long time. The mark will appear in the bottom right hand corner. If you look at that image when I upload it you will see that it is possible to cut off my copyright notice (which I have put out of the way on the inner border of the map because it was spoiling the view), but if you wanted to get rid of my little mouse paw 'seal' you'd have to cut a significant swathe off the bottom and side of the map which would aesthetically spoil the entire map and render it worthless in comparison to having the whole thing in one piece
Comments
Now that I've seen all the stuff about him generally about the place online, I think I need to rethink my map makers mark idea - with respect to the fact that it would be a bit like stealing someone else's mark!
Back to the drawing board! LOL!
Thanks for your help, Wyvern
As for the size of it, I want it around that size so folks cannot pretend they didn't see it. And I have met, and do know 2 people, who do think that way. No name on it, it must be there's, and not the person's who made it or bought it.
Hyperlinking from Pinterest or other such share sites is prohibited.
Can anyone enlighten me what the point of this PInterest is? I thought it was just some kind of social bookmarking service? (I.e. useless to me), but their website is about as useful and informative as a parking ticket. Do they sell/steal/violate stuff too?
Well I don't want a nice bright yellow tag in my ear, metaphorical or not!
The whole thing is just a huge control point that's rapidly taking over the entire web as more and more images are collected without the owner's knowledge or permission - in most cases by people who have nothing better to do with their lives than make virtual notice boards of pretty pictures of outlandish cup cakes and impractical shoes.
When I first started noticing how regularly my research was being affected by this virtual brick wall dividing me from my source information about a month back, I didn't know what Pinterest was either, so I searched for information the regular way - by words rather than pictures. That was when I came across a blog that seems to no longer exist, in which a system of advertising income was described. Apparently Pinterest either had, or planned to have, a piece of software that tracks visitors through their site so that when I click the blinds I want to buy, and which I found by Google's image search engine, I am forced to go through Pinterest just to get to the vendor, and Pinterest then charge for advertising the blinds. It wasn't clear to me just how the money was to be acquired, or from who, but there were lots of shocked and outraged comments on that blog about how it was bold as brass daylight robbery, because ultimately the customer will end up paying - one way or another.
I bet they were quite keen to have that particular blog removed, and they must be making a lot of money somehow to have the power to get it removed when it was causing quite a deal of excitement.
I totally disagree with anyone linking to or 'borrowing' even a thumbnail of my images, but if this advertising lark is what Pinterest have in mind for the future, then I'm going to do all I can to avoid having any of my author's webpage maps pinned up there on those boards, because I'm probably going to be struggling hard enough to make money from my writing with all the tax and fluctuating sales, without Pinterest suddenly starting to make demands on me for advertising my books without my knowledge or consent.
Another view is this - that people who pin stuff rarely ever give proper credit to the artist, and can make up their own comment - taking whatever kudos they fancy for themselves. So not only is pinning stealing the image as far as I'm concerned, it gets a whole bunch of words on it that you never intended should ever be associated with it.
Other than that I'd have to create an account to give you any more details, and I'm just not going to do it.
I did find a DMCA form on their site though, so I guess one could file those, US laws demand they respect those, right? But it sounds like the site would be a nightmare to navigate to identify such material. Sounds like a prime candidate for any blocklist.
If you prefer, just avoid it entirely in a Google search. If you add -site:pinterest.com to your search terms then Google will not return any results from Pinterest. You can "chain" these if, for example, you want to search for maps but you don't want results from Pinterest or from Reddit, your search terms would look something like this: dungeon map -site:pinterest.com -site:reddit.com . Google will not include anything from Pinterest or Reddit in it's search results.
Alternatively, if you use the site:somesite.com filter without the minus sign (hyphen) then the search results will only include items found on the indicated site. Naturally, you would replace somesite.com with the actual website domain you want to include (or exclude if you precede "site:" with a hyphen).
Note: I don't believe you can "chain" more than one site when filtering FOR a site, probably because, while you may mean "site x OR site y", Google is probably trying to perform a logical AND, but that's just an educated guess.
I hope that helps.
Cheers,
~Dogtag
That's extremely useful to know, since I'd rather not see pages and pages of things that I cannot have... if you see what I mean.
It also means that I can be more specific if I ever need to go chasing a map that I've been told has been pinned - without having to create an account. Presumably then I'd use Google and enter the search term with site:pinterest.com after it.
@ Remy - I didn't use the word 'evil', but that is what I meant.
They basically make you pay a few just to download or get the information to download a image and what is worse is that most image searches will go to there page I noticed with search pages and won't even show the original page they lifted the image from and make you go to Pinterest.
"Jim's map, free only. NOT for re-sale."
Not that I want to, but the buzzards leave me no choice.
@ Jim - for the time being, no there isn't, but I'm still hoping that if enough of us refuse to create accounts, and constantly exclude Pinterest from our search results (as I plan to do from now on), they will eventually die a natural death when the next 'in thing' comes along. I'm hoping its just a fad.
So there are very few maps on my sites at this time. I have kept up there the items, pdfs, etc. I am hosting for others.
So, I am now apparently confused as I don't have proof someone is selling my maps, therefore, it isn't happening. People astound me from time to time.
It shows the lines in my visitor logs i was bothered by, as links not found on my site.
So they aren't linking to sell, but looking for links that don't exist on my site.
So my, approximately, 2.12 gigabytes of pngs are back up on my sites.
As for not stopping people from selling my maps, I think I can stop them. It wouldn't be cheap, but it is a copyright violation.
To your first question, the folks on another forum, gamer, didn't try to explain anything to me. They just pointed out I was mistaken and there was nothing I could do to stop people from copying and selling my maps. I doubted their claim and I still do. Two people there stated that since I could provide no evidence of my stuff being sold, it wasn't being sold.
But thats a fallacy. Lack of evidence, doesn't mean lack of something going on. There are places out on the Internet where regular search engines don't go. So when the two complainers searched, them not finding anything was meaningless, but they decided it did have meaning.
However, I agree with what you've done, and I hope whoever is messing around at whatever they really are doing, think twice before disturbing your things again!
As for that other forum, there are folks there who like to argue, and since I cannot find the discussion there anymore, a mod likely deleted it.
© copyright 2016 Sue Daniel [Image_7010]
(its meant to be a mouse paw print, but needs a bit more work! LOL!)
It also needs to be only about a quarter of that size. None of it will cover any significant part of the map (hopefully being placed in the ocean or a desert or some such relatively empty feature), but the lump caused by the presence of the mark will make it fairly difficult to simply trim the copyright notice off the edge of the map.
Not sure what to use for my cartouche. Maybe a wolf's head, side view.
The mark isn't supposed to obscure any of the important bits or get in the way of other's enjoyment of the map.
In the next couple of days I'm going to be uploading the first update to Merelan City for a very long time. The mark will appear in the bottom right hand corner. If you look at that image when I upload it you will see that it is possible to cut off my copyright notice (which I have put out of the way on the inner border of the map because it was spoiling the view), but if you wanted to get rid of my little mouse paw 'seal' you'd have to cut a significant swathe off the bottom and side of the map which would aesthetically spoil the entire map and render it worthless in comparison to having the whole thing in one piece
As for putting it in blank areas, some of them, so far, have blank areas in the middle of the map... so that is where I put it. Thats in ocean anyway.
Its the small area maps, a few miles across, that I'll have to make decisions on what to cover up...