To block or not to block, that's the question.

swedguy · 2005-04-24, 05:33 PM

ronnie,

What is it that you want to protect your images from?

If you look at it from SE's POV it could be seen as cloaking. Different content is served.
Both images and text is copyrighted. But we still let them spider the text, so we can get hits. We also let them spider our images, so we can get hits. Maybe not as productive traffic, but that's our POV.

Spiders doesn't only spider regular html pages anymore. Images, videos, PDF, Power Point presentations, you name it.
Some doesn't like getting their PDF's spidered and some doesn't like their images spidered, but from SE's POV I don't think they appreciate that all hits to the document is redirected elsewhere. But from our POV, it's good. We can get more traffic to somewhere else. But it's the same thing as redirecting all traffic going to HTML pages, it's just a different media.

SaucyPanties,

Just send me a PM with your URL(s) and I'll take a look at it.

ronnie · 2005-04-24, 06:10 PM

Maybe I mis-understood your orginal post. I thought it was just about keeping google from hot linking your images. Maybe I am missing it or did'nt read the posts well enough. From what I read, your just blocking google or yahoo from loading the real image on their page or results. instead your giving them a different image, your not redirecting them. Guess I dont understand how it's cloaking, maybe just me..

I was saying the problem of hot linking has been around for a long time, I cant see the SE's penalizing any one for trying to stop it from happening to their site(s). Or having a system in place to try and prevent it.

ronnie

2005-04-24, 05:33 PM	#1
swedguy Vagabond Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 2,374	ronnie, What is it that you want to protect your images from? If you look at it from SE's POV it could be seen as cloaking. Different content is served. Both images and text is copyrighted. But we still let them spider the text, so we can get hits. We also let them spider our images, so we can get hits. Maybe not as productive traffic, but that's our POV. Spiders doesn't only spider regular html pages anymore. Images, videos, PDF, Power Point presentations, you name it. Some doesn't like getting their PDF's spidered and some doesn't like their images spidered, but from SE's POV I don't think they appreciate that all hits to the document is redirected elsewhere. But from our POV, it's good. We can get more traffic to somewhere else. But it's the same thing as redirecting all traffic going to HTML pages, it's just a different media. SaucyPanties, Just send me a PM with your URL(s) and I'll take a look at it.

2005-04-24, 06:10 PM	#2
ronnie Wheither you think you can or you think you can't, Your right. Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: midwest Posts: 2,274	Maybe I mis-understood your orginal post. I thought it was just about keeping google from hot linking your images. Maybe I am missing it or did'nt read the posts well enough. From what I read, your just blocking google or yahoo from loading the real image on their page or results. instead your giving them a different image, your not redirecting them. Guess I dont understand how it's cloaking, maybe just me.. I was saying the problem of hot linking has been around for a long time, I cant see the SE's penalizing any one for trying to stop it from happening to their site(s). Or having a system in place to try and prevent it. ronnie