Quote:
Originally Posted by inthecrack
This is probably the the most coherent presentation of your side of the argument so far. I have seen portions of our pictures at 200 pixel sizes that link to unaltered inthecrack content on a page which which in turn links to inthecrack. I'm cool with that.
To be clear? if we are only talking about thumbnails then this whole thread is a giant misunderstanding. We don't have readable watermarks on the thumbnails on our site either. However, if the thumbnail links to a full size image with the watermark removed then I have a bit of a problem with that. If I recall correctly the affiliate in question had resized the images to perhaps 75% of their original size and called them "giant thumbnails" so as to justify removing the watermark. Pardon the pun but that is a bit of a stretch. I don't think there was any unaltered content to be found in the links.
|
Ok, so be clear. It is ok to mess with your "works of art" to reduce them down to say 25% of their original size, but it is not ok to mess with your works of art to reduce them down to 75% of their original size. Perhaps you should be more clear in your TOS, what is the acceptable size to mess with your works of art.
