Legal Question

[Svein]

Indeed. No legal hassles whatsoever. When you put stuff up on the web, you implicitly give permission for others to create a link to your web page, where they will be seeing your images in the context you wanted them seen.

Smile,
Stein

Is that really the case though? What other context is there? If I provide a link to the source, and you don't like my "context", what difference does it make? Everyone who was reading my context is still seeing your image with my context, whether or not I post the photo direct (with a link to the original), or simply a link to the original without the photo. If they click the link, they see your photo, and its going to be within my context. The only difference is that its somewhere you put it.

I fail to see how this posting photo in this manner is problematic.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://s543.photobucket.com/albums/gg445/CAB_IV/Model%20Trains%202012/?action=view&current=P1091586.jpg">http://s543.photobucket.com/albums/gg44 ... 091586.jpg</a><!-- m -->

There is a clear difference between posting a link to somewhere else and using IMG tags to show the pic directly, at least technically. I don't remember if this has been mentioned earlier in this thread, but when you use the IMG tag to show a pic on "your" webpage, you are effectively stealing bandwidth from the other site every time someone loads your page. That's not very nice, is it? This is called "hotlinking", and is concidered bad form on the net.

I have never used any of the online pic hosting sites. I have my own domain, and store all my image files there. Big Blue is one of a very few sites that I allow hotlinking from my domain, any other site that tries to hotlink to any of my pics will just get a nice red stop sign:



Svein