read how maggie and nespray stole pictures at a blog claim the owner.
http://www.photomalaysia.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12291
http://www.photomalaysia.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12291
Chris Lim said:its a damn shame to have people doing things like that... Anyone here wanna advice on how we can better safekeep our work from things like that happening?
jeryltan said:Embed your ic. number as the digital watermark ID..
djork said:what if they alter the image by using a PS filter on it? will the watermark still be there?
jeryltan said:Embed your ic. number as the digital watermark ID..
whoswho said:Sure about that? Our eCitizen User ID is that and if it's broken into, anything can be done to your account on Government level, like CPF, Income Tax, and etc...
Hexlord said:How about keeping the original hi-res away from the Internet?
jeryltan said:IC. no. is pretty safe.. I can probably come up with a random number and it'll be someone's IC no. right? :bsmilie: for example, I'm sure 7513452 is someone's ic number? I'm referring to numbers only, excluding the last alphabet..
Chris Lim said:its a damn shame to have people doing things like that... Anyone here wanna advice on how we can better safekeep our work from things like that happening?
ortega said:i would be pleased if some BIG company stole me images
1. that would mean that my images have standard
2. that would mean that I can sue them for some big bucks
3. that would also mean time to Buy Buy Buy!
Don't think the lawyers will think of it as probono...more like delayed payment...cause they should be able to get costs covered by the defendants as well...shojibake said:It's not really maggi/nespray that stun the photos. It's the designer/ad company that did that. But should just get sue nestle anyway. Don't really know if there will be lawyers there that will take up pro bono work.
Are you from the east side of Singapore?shojibake said:There is an algorithm to determining your IC no. The preceding numbers actually tell you what the last letter is supposed to be, though it's a many to one relationship after some mathematical calculations.
It's not really maggi/nespray that stun the photos. It's the designer/ad company that did that. But should just get sue nestle anyway. Don't really know if there will be lawyers there that will take up pro bono work.
whoswho said:There's some specific algorithm used for generating IC nos. So, it might not be someone's IC number. And I believe, if some mathematician who knows reverse engineering will be able to figure out the alphabet too. (Extreme case)
But, it's better to be safe than sorry right?