-
Customize your forum experience with the xenForo-G-1-0 browser script. For additional information, see: Useful Custom Forum Script: xenForo-G-1-0
-
Welcome to the forum!
You must activate your account in order to post and view all forum content
Please check your email inbox & spam folders for our activation email, then follow the link to validate your email address.
Contact Us if you are having difficulty posting or viewing forum content.
-
You are viewing our forum as a guest, with limited access.
By joining you will gain full access to thousands of Videos, Pictures & Much More.
Membership is absolutely FREE! Registration is FAST & SIMPLE.
Register Today to join the first, most comprehensive and friendliest communities of nude celebrity fans on the net!
-
Now available to Registered Users and Senior Members is Celebrity/Supermodel Fake Images, Videos and Gifs pinned at the top of Misc Groups & Shows
Alexis Ren
- Thread starter mike.kollins
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2015
- Messages
- 1,928
- Reaction score
- 350
The complete St Barths photo-op. 79 frames including close crops in the host gallery. All shitpile tags removed.
And for the record, she was topless, not naked. The bikini bottoms stayed on.
Sites like Getty and Alamay put tags across the centre of their unlicenced sample images to protect their property. It's their business. They legally own the copyright to the images and if you want to use them with the tag removed you pay a license. Often they actually hire the photographers to produce the images. It's their work.
Other sites like JustJared & Egotastic and news publications and gossip mags are their customers. They reproduce images on their sites and they pay the license which entitles them to remove the watermarks and put their logo on them. They do so in the corner or - in the case of sites like Mr Skin which operate on the "fair comment" rule using screen grabs - in a frame surrounding the image. Except in headline indexes they don't tag the centres.
That's how it works.
Sites like fappeningblog are cashwhores. Just like the fuckwits who floodpost endless crap on forums using hosts that pay click through pennies because their pages are flooded with inline ads and datamining malware. They exploit the fair comment rule and they plaster their site tag across the centre of every image, defacing that image in the hope it will drive more traffic to their site raising their revenue from the advertisers.
They could put the tag in the corner. They could create a montage of several images with a banner to head each entry. They could even choose to tag one single image in a set. Few would complain.
I have no problem with entrepreneurialism and making a buck. I do have a problem with people who take the piss.
By putting it across the centre of every image in a set they don't just destroy all those images they also tacitly claim ownership of material they don't own and have no right to claim because they neither produced it nor licenced it.
Sharing that material encourages that behaviour. Ultimately it will destroy everyone's enjoyment because all but the fame chasers will copyright all of their material and protect it.
There are almost always other sources. There are also ways of removing those tags.
Tagged images are a cancer. Don't spread it.
BOC
And for the record, she was topless, not naked. The bikini bottoms stayed on.
Sites like Getty and Alamay put tags across the centre of their unlicenced sample images to protect their property. It's their business. They legally own the copyright to the images and if you want to use them with the tag removed you pay a license. Often they actually hire the photographers to produce the images. It's their work.
Other sites like JustJared & Egotastic and news publications and gossip mags are their customers. They reproduce images on their sites and they pay the license which entitles them to remove the watermarks and put their logo on them. They do so in the corner or - in the case of sites like Mr Skin which operate on the "fair comment" rule using screen grabs - in a frame surrounding the image. Except in headline indexes they don't tag the centres.
That's how it works.
Sites like fappeningblog are cashwhores. Just like the fuckwits who floodpost endless crap on forums using hosts that pay click through pennies because their pages are flooded with inline ads and datamining malware. They exploit the fair comment rule and they plaster their site tag across the centre of every image, defacing that image in the hope it will drive more traffic to their site raising their revenue from the advertisers.
They could put the tag in the corner. They could create a montage of several images with a banner to head each entry. They could even choose to tag one single image in a set. Few would complain.
I have no problem with entrepreneurialism and making a buck. I do have a problem with people who take the piss.
By putting it across the centre of every image in a set they don't just destroy all those images they also tacitly claim ownership of material they don't own and have no right to claim because they neither produced it nor licenced it.
Sharing that material encourages that behaviour. Ultimately it will destroy everyone's enjoyment because all but the fame chasers will copyright all of their material and protect it.
There are almost always other sources. There are also ways of removing those tags.
Tagged images are a cancer. Don't spread it.
BOC
Last edited:
