Submission Agreement Concerns

12 min read

Deviation Actions

spyed's avatar
By
587 Comments
14K Views
Browsing around our friendly land of the devious the past few days one might find a few ruffled feathers and the typical ruckus brought about by change.

Change is a hard thing to deal with for all people. We've learned this in a big way here at deviantART all these years, even small things like changing the layout slightly really upsets a lot of people.

So it is no surprise that when we change an agreement like the submission agreement even slightly, old & new issues resurface and everything has to be revisited once more. We understand this, and expected as much so it's really no big deal. If you have questions, ask away. If you raise a point that hasn't been addressed we'll be sure to answer as quickly as we can.

For Reference

<a href=about.deviantart.com/policy/su…>The Submission Agreement
<a href=about.deviantart.com/policy/su…>Changes Made to the Agreement

What I've found most interesting about the changes we made most recently to the submission agreement is that it's not the changes that have people worried. The concern is over items that existed in the agreement previously, the same points that every user has agreed to from just about the beginning of deviantART's life. The difference? We wanted to make sure we reinforced and clarified some of the clauses. So the law firm we're using decided to rewrite and simplify some of the wording to better protect deviantART. But the actual rights we are reserving are the same with little exception. The main new thing is our right of distribution to additional "electronic devices." Without this clause technically we couldn't allow people to browse deviantART from mobile phones, PDA's, iPod's and other devices with screens that we may make interfaces for, or provide methods to distribute to.

Some of the most heated and important clauses that some deviants had concern with I'll list below and I'll also provide one good example of why we need it even though there are plenty more. After all, one good reason is reason enough, right? Please refer to the agreement itself for the actual clauses being referenced.

:pointr: Section 2: Ownership

A very important clause to keep in mind while I explain the rest of this:

You own your art at all times without any question. deviantART does not own your art, nor is it trying to take your art. And we aren't printing your stuff and selling it without you knowing about it or something crazy like that. I can't believe someone suggested we'd do something like that! This submission agreement does not give us the rights to do such a thing.


:pointr: Section 3b: License to Use Artist Materials

Especially referring to the portion that states deviantART can publish your works to third party websites.  The whole point of joining deviantART and posting to deviantART is to publish your work on the Internet and its our job to get it out there.

We're actively working to better embrace RSS feeds. RSS is a format typically used to syndicate content, most frequently used by bloggers and news sites. We intend to employ similar methods to allow syndication of art work, like the daily top favorites and even the ability to stream your gallery to your personal website. We couldn't do this and things like this without third party rights because RSS feeders, blogging services and the like are third parties.

By the way this particular clause was not one of the changes we made to the submission agreement; it's been there for years.

:pointr: Section 4, Name & Likeness

When you submit your art work to deviantART, along with your user name and other information that may link your online identity to your real identity you receive exposure and promotion from deviantART. And I think it's fair to say you don't expect deviantART to pay you to submit art to your gallery or to deviantART.

In order to do this, deviantART retains what is called a royalty free right to publish your art. An example of publishing your art work is placing it in your gallery for other deviants to see.

Legally speaking with this clause in place, we could take one of your works of art, create a deviantART advertisement and say COME TO DEVIANTART, THERE'S LOTS OF COOL ART HERE. Or, BUY A SUBSCRIPTION, HERE'S A PIECE OF ART WORK TO LOOK AT, or something to this effect. And so long as your piece of art work is still on deviantART's servers, we have the right to use it in such a way without paying you.

But we don't do this when it highlights a particular artwork without requesting further permission from the artist. We once did, and we apologized furiously and gave the artist a free subscription for a year as an apology and stopped using it immediately. It was a miscommunication from our creative team. Turns out the artist ultimately encouraged us to use the work anyway, and at that point we did!

By the way, Section 4(b) is a good example of what I meant when I said some clauses were reinforced and some rewritten. If you <a href=about.deviantart.com/policy/su…>view
the changes document under this clause you'll see how the general theme of the clause is kept the same, but modified slightly to better protect deviantART from malicious lawsuits that deal with rights of publicity, privacy, etc.


:pointr: Section 11: No Liability for 3rd Party Use

By putting your art work on the Internet you are allowing people, people who we call in the agreement a “third party,” to view it and download it. I'm sure you are all aware of this: the very browser you use at this moment to view this text allows for a "PRINT" and "SAVE-AS" feature right in your "FILE" menu.

And so the second it's on somebody's hard drive or printed, deviantART is no longer responsible for what is done with it. Only because we can't be, we have nothing to do with it!

Trying to stop people from doing something so inherent to the basic functionality of a web browser (saving or printing) is a lesson in futility. It really is just the risk you take when you publish your work anywhere online, not just deviantART. It's up to you if publishing your work online is a worthwhile risk.  


:pointr: Section 14b: Assignment

This assignment clause is quite liberal for deviantART's purposes, but quite necessary to our operations. For example if we wanted to partner with another company to help us better provide the service of deviantART, which would affect the art you've submitted, we can do so without asking you. We wanted this in case we ever needed another company to help us store and save images in order to reduce costs or something to this effect. But to date we haven't needed to do this. One day we may!

Another situation where this clause is useful is if deviantART would like to partner with a software company to build an application. Let's say you could browse art through this deviantART branded application, but the app was technically owned by another company. We reserve the rights to do this. And you always reserve the right to prevent us from doing this by removing your work.

There is no example of a situation where we currently use the rights granted to us in this clause. But there may be a situation in the future where we might. In a situation that changes the way your work is distributed off the site we would give you options not to participate the way we've done with deviantMOBILE.


:pointr: Section 14f. Survival

A scary clause like this might put you off:

"Survival. The provisions of Sections 1, 3(e), 4(b) 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 shall survive any termination of this Agreement. In addition, any sublicenses granted to third parties for the display of Artist Materials on electronic devices pursuant to Section 3 shall survive any termination of this Agreement."

But certain rights need to survive the agreement. For example, lets say you submit a piece of art work that is in some way illegal. You then delete it and withdraw from deviantART. Just because you deleted it and withdraw doesn't mean that you stop being  responsible for the liabilities (if there are liabilities) resulting from when the piece you submitted was still on deviantART. Even though it's not on deviantART anymore, we can still hold you responsible for it because you should be responsible for it!


:pointr: Community Matters

I've seen a number of groups and journal entries popping up the last few days that  I find to be extremely misinformed. Others I find to be legitimate and worth reading.

:bulletred: newklear started a campaign he calls RESIST which can be found here. It started off completely misinformed claiming that deviantART was stealing your work and selling it. The typical hysteria where someone exclaims through the ceiling that they're being screwed. But since then it's evolved into a site that is equally uninformed but with greater purpose. It requests protections under such things as the Creative Commons license and International Copyright treaties.

Response: That's great and all but the Creative Commons license and the Copyright Treaties - - a subject that on an entirely different note we will be addressing in the future - - don’t have anything to do with the submission agreement.  As I said before at the beginning, you own your artwork at all times and the copyright.  Any creative commons or other license we make available on deviantART would be in addition to the submission agreement for deviantART. I do respect newklear and his effort to stand up for his rights. That's very commendable.

:bulletred: <a href=comments.deviantart.com/5/4994…>A user posted a response by their lawyer which I find to be relatively accurate. That's exactly what a lawyer would say; their job is to make sure you don't lose any rights at all. If it were up to your lawyer, their legal advice to protect your art work is to register it with every office possible, then save it on a disk, put it in a bank and never show anybody.

The bottom line is: their lawyer’s legal analysis is accurate when it comes to posting your art work on the Internet ANYWHERE even if there is no legal agreement. But what the lawyer doesn’t analyze is what you get in return for posting to deviantART.  For example if you post your work online pretty much anywhere including your own website someone, anyone, can copy it to their hard drive and turn it into wallpaper without paying you or browse it “for free” on their mobile device.  Their lawyer says: “that’s bad; you should get something when your work is used.”  But if you also told him “Oh, two million people a day from every part of the world will be able to see my work when its posted and I can try and sell them prints of it and hundreds of thousands of artists will see it too and some of them will give me advice and comments that help me as an artist and make me feel good about being around other artists that can actually understand what I’m doing…;” then the lawyer would probably say “Oh, well I just wanted you to know what your rights were.”   

deviantART in this instance is your "service provider" and must protect itself from frivolous lawsuits. We do have smart lawyers and we do use them well and their job is to protect the community and its artists so we can all have this community. We run an open and free atmosphere that anybody can join. And approximately 1% of those millions of people join with bad intentions and some of those could do really bad things. We have an agreement in place that protects deviantART, because, if we didn't, we'd get frivolous lawsuits that would shut us down.

We reserve greater rights than we actually use so that we do not take risks we cannot afford. And we always allow artists to walk away, we do not lock you in. If we tried to lock you in, you should be worried. But you can walk away at any time.

Bottom line: We don’t screw over artists and never will even if hell freezes over.  
Published:
© 2005 - 2021 spyed
Comments586
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Kalistik-Cheryzia's avatar
The part the kinda freaks me out is the part that I'm interpreting as meaning that DA can post your name in conjunction with your work... Your real name. I don't want my real name anywhere online... Actually debating leaving over that...
Kaeldra-1's avatar
Thanks, that really helped me understand the user agreement better :)
forceof's avatar
RRRRRRIIIIIIIIIGGGGHHHHHTTTT.....

Well.

Judgement is being reserved for now, but I'd love to see someone really sit up and challenge certain parts of the UA. That'd make for some real entertainment.
nusong's avatar
I have worked for a software company that has, at times, been not the most straightforward in their customer dealings. Because of this, I have started reading other UA's and have lost alot of trust in how UA's are presented to the end user.

I have been with DA for a while now and I admit that I didnt fully read/understand the UA when I joined.

Easy to read terms are never a substitute for legal wording as the easy to read terms are never legally binding, nor were they ever agreed to. I would like to see that happen. That would do alot to allay concerns. Granted, getting lawyers involved usually means that they are working for you, the client, and will have your best interest in mind. This is why lawyers from both sides have different views.

Granted, now that I read and understand the UA, all previous work done by me is under that so there is nothing retroactive that I can do. I can however choose to not post or to only post things that I am not concerned about.

I have yet to receive an email regarding any changes to the UA.
Moofers-Mufa's avatar
That cleared a lot up on my end I can now get that disheartening feeling out of my system...
DesertBlu's avatar
Could you tell me when we were notified that this was changed? I do not recall receiving an email from this company stating the changes. I am growing tired of all the political crap that is happening here and trying to figure out for myself what has happened. I just do not understand how this all happened and no one was made aware of it... I wonder if your reading all the notes on this site and are you even questioning why people are putting works in storage and how is this going to help this site? I don't know I have alot of questions and considering I have paid for 3 memberships I think I am seeking answers to questions that I should be given without the attitude. So... fill me in please!
Ernest-Blofeld's avatar
Sorry again. I write too much, and now I add more.

The survival part, that forces certain things to survive 'ANY termination of this agreement' is the issue in some people's minds. Perhaps you should specify which terminations it applies to rather than all of them. What if, though unlikely, you find a loophole that means you want to change one of those sections? You have to rewrite that section. Though in your mind it is the same agreement, technically, it is a new one, just with mostly the same words. As a new agreement, it implies the termination of the old one, which you want, because the modification is the right one. Heres an example:

say person one makes the agreement say 'we can put stuff anywhere. This clause shall survive any termination"

and later want it to read 'we can put stuff on our site.'

They rewrite it.

Which one applys?
They are both in effect.
How about 'sections yellowalien,ninja,atomicwedgie shall survive termination of this agreement by Artist or DA corp exept in the case of the modification or replacement of this agreement by DA corp."

This, at least, allows you to fix stuff if you must.
Ernest-Blofeld's avatar
With that right to publish stuff, how about a clause that says "grants DA corp the right to display artists work ONLY on deviant art corp's website, and any descendants or extentions thereof" or something. Yes, I am sure that DA wouldn't do anything like use our art somewhere else, but the issue is that it is possible. Or how about something that requires any offsite use to be with our permission:

"DA corp agrees to use artist materials and the like only on methods of media and visual communication that are owned by DA corp (ie the website), and only on those owned by others with and only with specific written permission from artist in the form of e-mail, note(as used on the current DA site), registered mail, fax, or other tangible or traceable material or method transmitted in person, electronically, or via other traceable method."

and for that stuff about covering mobile phones, and pdas and the like:

"artist acknowledges that content may be modified for the purpose of being viewed on forms of media including, but not limited to: graphical mobile phones, pdas/palm pilots/hand held computers, other objects with smaller screens requiring the modification or compression of images and content so as to allow said material to be displayed on such objects. Methods in which viewers of the DA corp website and any other visual media owned by DA corp access and view and/or display such media are not the responsibility of DA corp."

That should allow you to make the site viewable on anything, especially if it requires you to shrink the images.

We know that you wouldn't use our work without our permission, but technically you have it with that agreement. Specific permission in the case of advertisement should be included. I know, again, that you wouldn't do that, but the agreement doesn't say that you wouldn't. Just like I would never try to sue DA corp for whatever stupid reason, but you still have to cover yourself, so to do we as artists have to make sure that we have in writing what we need to protect ourselves. What if, God forbid, something were to happen to you, and your replacement was someone who did not care about the artists at all? What if that person were to use our stuff for ads, and whatever else, without further permission from us? You wouldn't, but it is possible that another might. Because of random chance, and stupid stuff, we have to cover our backs, just like you do.

And please, please ad electronic mail to the list of allowable forms of communication. You could even make it only allowable if the message is sent from the address currently listed as 'artist's' e-mail address on DA itself. You all have e-mails. You know how to use them. You also allow for an address to be put into the user info for an account. Yes, it could be faked, but not any easier than a registered mail notice. Sorry this is so long. I tend to do that.
PrettyGirlsWithGuns's avatar
Thank goodness you posted this...I have seen too much of people claiming such crap! Now hopefully it is finally solved
dominique871's avatar
My goodness, I was scared for a moment there. Thanks for clearing it up.
Spreggo's avatar
I get pissed off when the government reserves greater rights than it 'actually uses', so why should this be any different? DeviantArt is still a business, and while the guys in charge are from what I hear great people, they might not always be in charge, and its highly possible that these extra rights will be abused. But obviously, as much as everyone wants it to be, dA is not really a open community, it is still a private business and can be run in anyway (within law) that its owners see fit. So, if you don't like it, move out. I did anyways.
Sin-nombre's avatar
Modification.
deviantART reserves the right to amend the terms of this Agreement from time to time in its sole discretion. deviantART shall notify Artist of any material changes to this Agreement by sending an email to the address listed in Artist’s account. If Artist continues to upload Artist materials after being notified of the changes to the Agreement, Artist will be deemed to have accepted those changes and the new terms of the Agreement shall govern all prior and future submissions of Artist Materials. If Artist does not accept the new terms of the Agreement, Artist’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement. Otherwise, Tthis Agreement may be changed only by a writing signed by both parties that specifically refers to the parties' intent to amend this Agreement.

I didn't reciebe any mail...
TwistedPear's avatar
Wouldn't it be better to put the explanations within the submission agreement itself, rather than having to explain them in newsposts instead? It seems to me that it would alleviate much of the confusion/hostility that seems to have sprun up over this...

Cheers :)
verius's avatar
yes 3b is scary in one sense. But in another its good, lets say deviant art gets some form of pubicity from another big website, for all intents and purposes lets say CNN, and this website wants a big galery of the work published in deviant art, and i mean big. If this was the case then dev art could quite simply make the go ahead. Now who here wouldn't want their work, with their name published on the CNN website. I know I would, because it would mean that a huge amount of people would see it.

I think that they would ask any one whose art would be published this way, and think that they should ask anyone whose art they consider. They don't spevifically state that they will in the agreement, this I think is because certain people could interpret this to mean that deviant art has to ask an artist whether, in an extreme case, thier art may be viewed by a specific person or people browsing through DA, or for these people to download it to their hard drive. Yes this is third party use. Section 11 is about the same thing. With out this DA would not work because you'd get certain numbnuts trying to sue DA. DA just wants to make sure that this does not happen, and protect its interrests, as any other company would do too. By doing this DA also protects the community. If you cannot accept these things i think you will have to leave in order to make sure that DA cannot screw you over. Btw if you haven't realised that most people in this world can screw you over, and that some most certainly will, you are not prepared for life.

note that you can effectively stop all ripping by placing a water mark on your image that states who you are, ie your real name, and that its your copyright. sadly you will have to do this so that it covers the whole of your image in order to make it work perfectly. If this isn't enough, then cease to use the internet, because in hte internet no where is safe from people copying your work..

Kitsch and Paranoia are ruining society, although the first can be very fun in some cases.

I personnally think that the agreement is suited for what deviant art does. It basically ensures that deviant art has nothing to do with copyright violations that are construed by anyone, and to tell the truth if i were to make anything vaguely like what DA is i would make damn well sure that i would be in the same position as DA is. note that all of this does not mean that DA, or me for that matter, will screw you over. It just means that DA doesn't want to get screwed over itself,

Disclaimer: I am not an employee of deviant art. I have not been payed to write this or any other posts on any other message board, previous to the 20th of April 2005. All views and statements stated above are my own. I will not budge from these views without a thought through logical explanation of why i should, so don't bother flaming. Even if such an explanation is presented to me i will reserve myself the option to ignore any such explanation, so you post any explanations, directed specifically at me, at your own risk.
thewhopunk's avatar
you smell like cabbage
kreelah's avatar
Thanks for the enlightment! :nod:
I confess I trust deviantART all too well to read through all the agreement (though I should), but the fact is tha the agreement is there for a reason... and you cleared the troublesome issues. :)
Thanks again. :thanks:
Deity37's avatar
that's all nice... but it's an interpertation, not the agreement it's self. the way the agreement is set up DA COULD sell all your art, should they be so inclined, to whom they chose for whatever reason they deem worthy, without even notifying you, should this policy remain the way it is I am (like others) considering leaving the DA community unless I am shown Proof that this Agreement Protects me, As of now this is a one sided agreement, Allowing DA Free Reign over my Creative Turf and Me nothing, except the use of their site (Note: the only reason I have not already left is because I have payed for a subscription)
Aeires's avatar
It's been a while and the dust has settled, thank God. My only complaint is that the setup is all backwards. The deviant mobile system should be coded so that it's default off. I have an image I just posted that I cannot disable because of a bug somewhere in the system. I do not desire my art to be compressed to a 2 inch screen, but there is nothing I can do about it except delete the image because the system is coded to default on. Is there any way the mobile system can be changed to default off so that this never happens again?
kargath64's avatar
Kinda funny how every response has glossed over 3d). Scary paragraph, that.
Alquicira's avatar
My questions...
After all this discussion I still had some doubts

Has deviantArt contract for the use of our works with third persons? ... if it is like that, can we have access to this information?... Does This contract with third persons (if this one exists) protect us?... If it does not exist, The users we should make a contract of SELF-DEFENCE and sign it with Deviant art...

For those of Not English languages ... and to avoid bad interpretations...
Can DeviantArt have available Agreements in other languages?

In case my works are used for "X" use, I Preserve the rights of copyright, therefore DA is obliged to find out in that they are used, certainly...

If they are selling or commercializing, DA should have at least the inconvenience To notice to me and to be possible, to share the proffits, because, of any way, I did the work... I have right to some profit...
RisingDragoness's avatar
I'm fine with everything you've explained, I personally have no problem since my gallery is for screenshots of the sites I make and coloring...however...

To quote your response to *afterchain's post about her lawyer's remarks

"...their lawyer’s legal analysis is accurate when it comes to posting your art work on the Internet ANYWHERE even if there is no legal agreement. But what the lawyer doesn’t analyze is what you get in return for posting to deviantART. For example if you post your work online pretty much anywhere including your own website someone, anyone, can copy it to their hard drive and turn it into wallpaper without paying you or browse it “for free” on their mobile device. Their lawyer says: “that’s bad; you should get something when your work is used.” But if you also told him “Oh, two million people a day from every part of the world will be able to see my work when its posted and I can try and sell them prints of it and hundreds of thousands of artists will see it too and some of them will give me advice and comments that help me as an artist and make me feel good about being around other artists that can actually understand what I’m doing…;” then the lawyer would probably say “Oh, well I just wanted you to know what your rights were.”

What a load of bs, spyed. I love you, I love the idea of dA, but the above is bs. First off...I currently am building my business site for graphic design with an emphasis on web design. Since this site is going to be a HUGE part of my portfolio when I apply for work, it's important everything's secure - I don't need people stealing the graphics and code I work so hard on, especially when I'm trying to prove that I am a skilled, unique designer. But, during the building of my site, I found this wonderful little code. Y'see, this code allows me to disenable right-click, popping up an icon asking people to e-mail or IM me if they are curious about the picture. Plus, I use screenshots, so they're doubly safe. So, there goes your 'post it anywhere anybody can take it' - my website is secure and it's a free site, unlike deviantART, which probably costs an arm and a leg with bandwidth and everything added in. Plus, what about invisible watermarks or just watermarks in general? There are ways to keep art safe, guys. You aren't the only security measure out there.

Mobile device? Why include that? I SUPPOSE (and this is supposing - my parents are cellular technicians and couldn't answer my question) that if you had signed up for one of those types of services, downloaded the picture(s), and then were able to transfer them to your phone via that service, that makes sense. Buuuut, that all relies on having the picture, and if you disable the ability to get a picture then it pretty much is impossible, or on having the picture be of good quality, which is hard if the artist has a watermark. Plus, from what I can tell, this wallpaper needs to have been added to a wallpaper site's database so you can SMS them the product code, and these sites want to avoid law suits just as badly as deviantART does.

Okay, onto wallpapers. I'm not sure if you mean for cell phones (see above for my response), but in the way of desktop wallpapers, I have never read or heard of an artist being upset by that (and I love reading people's old journals). Of course, I'm sure some people do have problems with it, but the majority of what I've heard is nothing, so I suppose you can say yes, there IS a wallpaper problem. Yet again, I have listed above several ways to prevent this if there is a problem.

As for your response to the lawyer's indifference...too long, guys, too long. The beginning makes sense - deviantART is a large site, artists have the PROBABILITY of a lot of pageviews (aka exposure), and your deviantPRINTS program, though not something I fully agree with, is a very useful resource. However, the end kinda isn't needed. That's an unspoken reason for joining dA - friendship, community, and a chance to grow, not an excuse to feed us as to why your revisions are good.

I have both of the agreements currently open - why does it seem like all the 'revisions' (the lined-out stuff, I should assume, and the words directly after) aren't really changes? I'll cite the first one I found, article 3b (or section 3, subsection 2), the license to use artist materials:
"to display, copy, reproduce, exhibit, publicly perform, broadcast, rebroadcast, transmit, retransmit, distribute through any electronic means (including analog and digital), and electronically publish any or all of the Artist Materials, including any portion thereof, and to include them in compilations for such purposes, by any and all means and media now known or hereafter devised (for avoidance of doubt, the rights granted to deviantART hereunder include the rights to make Artist Materials available on deviantART Site(s), third-party websites and electronic devices)"

Now, as for the changed Submission of the same section:
"to display, copy, reproduce, exhibit, publicly perform, broadcast, rebroadcast, transmit, retransmit, distribute through any electronic means (including analog and digital), and electronically publish any or all of the Artist Materials, including any portion thereof, and to include them in compilations for such purposes, by any and all means and media now known or hereafter devised (for avoidance of doubt, the rights granted to deviantART hereunder include the rights to make Artist Materials available on deviantART Site(s), (crossed-out:and/or) third-party websites and electronic devices)"

Does this look familiar? Cause it sure looks the same to me, just you added and/or to cross-out.

I thought I trusted deviantART - you guys have a wonderful site, it looks beautiful and works like a dream...but from what I can tell, my dissent won't be approached or absolved, and it's the minority artists that scream "INJUSTICE!" that you will listen to. And y'know what? That's okay, it's the way everything works. People can make the majority happy, but begin to worry so much about the unhappy minority that they do everything to make them happy, and forget about the majority. THERE IS NO HAPPY MEDIUM! You don't screw artists over, I agree, but you're lying to us. If somebody disagrees, I will post every single before and after clause that has been changed to help strengthen my point.

I suppose that I can't completely bash you, spyed, so I will give you this: for people who may not understand lawyer-ese, this is a good article. You explain things well, and for that I applaud you. But, I don't agree with the contents of this article whatsoever.

:heart:
inerlogic's avatar
yah, this is an old post i know....

"I'm trying to prove that I am a skilled, unique designer. But, during the building of my site, I found this wonderful little code. Y'see, this code allows me to disenable right-click, popping up an icon asking people to e-mail or IM me if they are curious about the picture. Plus, I use screenshots, so they're doubly safe. So, there goes your 'post it anywhere anybody can take it' - my website is secure"


if someone came to me looking for a job as a web/graphic designer and told me their stuff was secure, i'd laugh them out of my office... because i know better, there's no such thing....

send me the URL to this site of yours and i'll email you every image and line of code :)

you can not have a page display on someone's computer, and have it be secure, it's impossible ipso facto.
RisingDragoness's avatar
Ouch. That hurts, my friend. Anyways, in response...

Yeah, I know that no site can be truly safe. I know there's always loopholes. But for the instance they gave, that's one of the better ways to prevent theft. I'd have to be either incredibly stupid or technologically-challenged to believe it would be 100% safe, and I don't think that.

:heart:
Idle-Hero's avatar
I *could* just take a screenshot and crop out the image I want.....
No right-clicking involved. ;)

Course' when you right click an image here to save... it places the title as well as the artist/author right in the file name... I suppose that is better than opening up a desktop-freeze and popping it in MSpaint.

Realy, even with all the anti-theft/forgery/ect. fail-safes you can put on something, even the sub-average user may, more often than not, beable to take what they want when they want. I think it's best that even if they are worried about it, why limit functionality for the sake of what may in fact, be a harmless attempt to show others a cool piece of "art" or even make themselves a nice wallpaper.

I'm all for right clicking. Of course, I'm not malicious... I just beleive in freedom and funtionality :shimmy:

Thanks for your time. You made a good argument. I probably didn't dent it.
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In