watermarking sponsor's content

[ilikexxx]

Are you allowed to add your own watermark to sponsor's content while keeping the original one? Like adding your domain to all the pics?

[Halfdeck]

Nope.

[Cleo]

No, it is not your content.

[PR_Tom]

Even with content you purchase, you need to carefully read the license to see if thats even allowed.

[ilikexxx]

Thanks for help

What about some text that helps promote the site/program? Something like "for full size go to blablah.com" still not allowed?

[Ramster]

Originally Posted by ilikexxx

Thanks for help

What about some text that helps promote the site/program? Something like "for full size go to blablah.com" still not allowed?

No.

All you are allowed to do (usually) is resize the photos so they are not so big.

[emmanuelle]

Some sponsors will not even permit you to rename them

[Toby]

Originally Posted by emmanuelle

Some sponsors will not even permit you to rename them

I've seen that in sponsors terms a few times, usually at sponsors with lots of other rules that make it difficult to promote their sites.

Now back to the original topic, I see nothing to gain from watermarking sponsor content. Just properly configure your .htaccess files to prevent hotlinking and the only way to view the images is from your gallery page.

Those that would save them, and upload elsewhere are most likely going to crop off any watermarks or URLs anyway.

Just my 2¢, for what it's worth

[RawAlex]

Toby, the only advantage to watermarked content is that all images (and videos) do get out in the wild, and having your name on it always helps. That is why the programs do it (amoungst other reasons), knowing of course that they benefit from the type in traffic that you will never see...

If you intend to watermark content, make sure you are contractually allowed to do it. Some programs are very paranoid about it, and some content providers are not very happy about it either.

Alex

[Toby]

I understand why sponsors do it, I just don't see a time/cost benefit for the affiliate to add theirs too.

[LB]

I think the main problem a sponsor would have is many sites have multiple sponsors, and also what happens if they rotate out the sponsor whose content they are using?

I think you would find this is a big no.

[Servhot]

For your own content we would allow this, but usually if you use sponsored content, the domains of the sponsor program can be added, but not yours if you use a different domain to advertise for the sponsor. But, I guess, if you are doing well for the sponsor they will prevent you with a sub domain of there program and then you probably can do it

[ecchi]

Now this is one of the reasons why I am such a nice guy. I do not watermark the content I give out to affiliates, but I do allow them to watermark it with their ref code:
"2. You may may make thumbnails of this content, and slightly reduce the quality or size (or both), you may also add the URL of one of our sites with your link code (or without your link code if you like, but that would loose you money) to these pictures, but you may make no other changes to them."

Surprisingly I saw one affiliate who watermarked it with my site URL but did not add their affiliate code. I am still trying to work out why!

[ecchi]

I just discovered another advantage to posting on this board. Rereading my last post, I realised that the rule I quoted from my affiliates area is badly worded, almost to Roman Moroni level. I guess I'd better go correct it.

[Kenny B!]

Adding your watermark or cropping out the original watermark is usually a big no-no.

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by ilikexxx

Are you allowed to add your own watermark to sponsor's content while keeping the original one? Like adding your domain to all the pics?

Interesting question, I can also see some value in doing this if you are 'marketing' the images. P2P is a good medium and right now it costs big bucks to buy this type of advertising.

If someone came to me and said could they re mark my content to promote / co promote I would say yes.

Would the regular LL list the sites, maybe not though if you were letting people hotlink and letting surfers share them, then hell yes.

I think you need to talk with your sponsors, most are more then happy to work with webmasters and adapt things to help you market and some will not.

[SirMoby]

It's possible that some sponsors may allow it so the real answer is maybe. Of course I don't know of any sponsor that does allow it and I can't think of any reason why they would but it is possible.

Unless the content has been offered as public domain or it says in the terms that you can then the answer is NO WAY

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by SirMoby

It's possible that some sponsors may allow it so the real answer is maybe. Of course I don't know of any sponsor that does allow it and I can't think of any reason why they would but it is possible.

Unless the content has been offered as public domain or it says in the terms that you can then the answer is NO WAY

OK, but what if it does not cover the topic then of course he you can do it. Lets face any content the webmasters use is just one level down from the public domain.

The way I see it is if you are using a picture or movie and the only paysite you are selling tickets for are the people who gave you the content then there should be no issue.

We are the people that have to sell their site, sometime the sponsors forget that.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

OK, but what if it does not cover the topic then of course he you can do it. Lets face any content the webmasters use is just one level down from the public domain.

The way I see it is if you are using a picture or movie and the only paysite you are selling tickets for are the people who gave you the content then there should be no issue.

We are the people that have to sell their site, sometime the sponsors forget that.

With that kind of thinking we may see your name in the possible cheaters forum...

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by Surfn

With that kind of thinking we may see your name in the possible cheaters forum...

I don't see how I am cheating with this view, personally I speak with sponsors idearlly on the phone before I promote them and explain what I need.

My request tends to be the same content in 20's unmarked. I show them sites I have made and explain clearly what I will be doing and promoting.

Its basic business Surfn, right now I am trying to see what you see is cheating |confused|

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

I don't see how I am cheating with this view, personally I speak with sponsors idearlly on the phone before I promote them and explain what I need.

My request tends to be the same content in 20's unmarked. I show them sites I have made and explain clearly what I will be doing and promoting.

Its basic business Surfn, right now I am trying to see what you see is cheating |confused|

Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups.


The typical affiliate program assumes that the typical webmaster has some modicum of common sense. Something I find difficult to assign these days.


It's probably not in the TOS of any of your sponsor programs that you are allowed to walk into crowded mall with a gun and force several hundred people to use their CC to sign up either. Common sense should dictate this.

The right way to do it is contact someone at the sponsor and get an answer before proceeding.

Again Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups.

[ecchi]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

I don't see how I am cheating with this view

A photo is automatically the copyright of the photographer unless they have sold that right on (eg to your sponsor). Whoever has copyright has final say in what can and cannot be done to it. If they say "you can use this photo to advertise our site" then you can do that, and only that. The way the law runs is that altering it and publishing it (even on a website) is assumed banned unless the copyright holder gives you permission to do so. In other words, if he don't say you can, he means you cannot, and the law is on his side if he catches you.

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

Lets face any content the webmasters use is just one level down from the public domain.

Do you like your house? Your car? Your stereo, TV, DVD? And everything else you own? I hope not, because if you practise this theory and you are caught, you are going to have to sell the lot to cover court costs and what you will owe the copyright owner.

However I cannot understand why sponsors do not allow this. As I said in a previous post, I allow affiliates to watermark my content with my site's URL and their affiliate code. When I mentioned this point in my sig on another board, with a link to my affiliate program I got a hell of a lot of sign ups (several times what I got doing the same thing but promising high profits)

[Useless]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

Lets face any content the webmasters use is just one level down from the public domain.

No, that's not true. Any level of ownership is a HUGE step away from being public domain. Almost nothing is public domain.

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

We are the people that have to sell their site, sometime the sponsors forget that.

Yes, and they make content available to us to promote THEIR sites, not ours. A sponsor's content is not meant to be a traffic source.

[SmithsMedia]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

No, that's not true. Any level of ownership is a HUGE step away from being public domain. Almost nothing is public domain.
Yes, and they make content available to us to promote THEIR sites, not ours. A sponsor's content is not meant to be a traffic source.

I think you have mis understood me, reading your second comment, if I was to do this and marked it with a site promoting their programme.

I dont think its right to have a picture of 'Jane.com' and then put a url for a site on it that is not promoting the 'jane.com'

Heres a site I have that is a live sample of what I mean -

this http://www.inbedwithfaith.org.uk/in-...aith/page1.htm

I would not use it for anything else, no point thats what they are wanting to buy. These pages get funkstered and stuff which leads to sales.

Regarding onwership levels I don't disagree, I have met a lot of people around europe with sites and other content producers, most people acept that if you are online your stuff will get ripped off. Again I dont think this is good but we all realise this is what happens.

BTW UW I saw an old post re a freesite project you were doing, this is why I was coming here - now I am locked into this dam debate

[frankthetank]

Originally Posted by SmithsMedia

I think you have mis understood me, reading your second comment, if I was to do this and marked it with a site promoting their programme.

I dont think its right to have a picture of 'Jane.com' and then put a url for a site on it that is not promoting the 'jane.com'

Heres a site I have that is a live sample of what I mean -

this http://www.inbedwithfaith.org.uk/in-...aith/page1.htm

I would not use it for anything else, no point thats what they are wanting to buy. These pages get funkstered and stuff which leads to sales.

Regarding onwership levels I don't disagree, I have met a lot of people around europe with sites and other content producers, most people acept that if you are online your stuff will get ripped off. Again I dont think this is good but we all realise this is what happens.

BTW UW I saw an old post re a freesite project you were doing, this is why I was coming here - now I am locked into this dam debate

Intellctual property law has more or less different rules in different countries. But there are international contracts which have brought some standards. For further information have a look here:

http://www.wipo.int/library/en/

One is that the owner of the property - and only the owner - is allowed to mark the property with his name or business name.
It´s exactly that what you do with your domain name in the example and it´s of course not allowed, because you claim to be the owner of that property, though you don´t have any copyrights on that pic.