Jono

Guys and Girls,

There's more and more threads popping up about content stealing. I'm sure the honest ones amongst us have wondered how to stop these leeching fuckers?
Here's an idea I've come up with, I've not got copyright on it, so if anyone wants to go out there and make that $million, please do so :-)
Set up a Content Registry Database (CRD) on the net.
Define a product code standard, for example a 14 digit code broken up like this:
CCCCMMMMMXXXXX
CCCC would be the number of the content provider, assigned by the CRD (for a fee?)
MMMMM would be a content purchasers number, again you would have to register at the CRD (only once) before you can buy content.
XXXXX would be the content providers picture set number.
When you then enter your data into the TGP submit form, you would also enter your 14 digit code. This number can be cross referenced with the CRD either manually or during submission.
The CRD would be updated everytime a set is purchased via a content provider so it has every set ever bought on it.
An agreement between all content providers and (most) TGPs would be required for this to work, but it would cut down on TGP gallery cheaters by a huge percentage.
As for content that has already been bought, perhaps a backtrack could be done to have numbers assigned....
Any further ideas on this? or Am I talking total shit?

FlyingIguana

if someone could setup a script to run this it would be great. content providers could help pay the cost when they sell content. like add a niminal fee to each set to help with the server costs.

when u buy the product code goes into the database, as well as your email. then when u submit u put in the product code and it checks the databse along with your email to make sure its u.

would be a problem with old content tho.

spanky

I actually did some r&d for a company that was sort of along those lines but they went under (don't get me started, they still owe me money) before they had anything that could go public and would scale well.

Just playing devil's advocate here but wouldn't you need some manner of identifiying the content itself and matching that identity to the CRD ID in an automated process for this to work?

Let's say Harry Thief buys himself a $2.99 set from rockbottomcontent. Rockbottomcontent issues him a CRD ID for his set. He then steals all of Honest Joe's pics and submits them around town with his perfectly valid CRD ID and email address. Unless the system can match the actual content that is submitted with the ID used this situation will slip through without raising any alerts.

It would still be a matter of having to actually look for copyright violations linked from participating TGPs.

Granted there might be more accountability when a copyright holder sees a potential violation as the content producer that issued the CRD ID to Harry Thief would have his contact and billing information.

Interesting though, you should keep rolling with it and see what comes up.

cheers

roadtrip

You could write a program to "brand" the image,
as long as the webmaster didn't fuck with the orginal.

Take the 8th bit of the first 38 pixel's RGB values
and use them for the data storage. This will only
put the colour off on the first 38 pixels very slightly.
(38 for the scheme discribed, we could do better if
it was an ID referanced to a database.) A simple
program could check right on the submittion verification
as they do a thumb is really link to a pic check.

I have a program that brands an ID into all our
orginal content "somewhere" in the middle and in
a "pattern" that jpeg doesn't like to further compress.
98% of the time when I pull a pic of ours off the net
that has been borrowed, I can still run my verifier
across it and pull out the ID. It's only when the theif
messes with the brightness and contrast greatly that
I lose the ID tagging.

Sending a copy of the verifier program with a cease
and desist letter gets stuff taken down very quickly.

... It's old technology that I borrowed from a program
that wrote hidden messages into gif files from the
BBS days.

FlyingIguana

wonder if u can do that with movies?

ServerGenius

Very nice ideas.....but the problem is to get everybody to work
with a system like this.....I really don´t see that happen.

DynaMite

__________________
| http://www.sinnerscash.com/ | ICQ: 370820 | Skype: SinnersCash | AdultWhosWho |

spanky

Very cool. There are a lot of watermarks that use the low order bits of the blue byte as the eye doesn't see much there but jpeg compression ruins most of those. Having a pattern in the middle that jpeg doesn't like to compress is great as it ought to be there even after a severe crop.

Once again, playing devil's advocate. The problem with a standard pattern would be that a thief (not your run of the mill thief, were talking a thief with a background in statistics here) could grab a lot of images that they knew were branded and search for patterns that were consistent across all of the images. This pattern would presumably be the identifying brand. Once the brand (if it is a constant) is isolated it would be a simple matter for the thief to write a script or program to remove/modify the pattern in the images. Chances are this caliber of thief won't be happy keeping such a program to himself and will attempt to distribute it on the net with a point and click interface for dummies.

What if the CRD ID or a unique password was used in the algorithm that defined the embeded pattern? That would make it a lot more difficult to gather reliable statistical data. The downside is that it would make it a lot more difficult for the automated process to check for the existence of this pattern.

Exactly. The infrastructure costs of expecting every TGP/adult search engine to change to a new system would be huge and unrealistic. However, if there was a way of reliably branding the content I don't believe that it would require the active participation of the TGPs/ search engines. A standard LWP bot could actually surf the net looking for potential violations.

I know, I know "the internet is huge, even google can't spider the entire internet with their 12000+ computers". The internet is huge but most of it is not very busy. Traffic on the internet, especially adult traffic looking for free xxx, seems to funnel into a relatively small collection of web sites (when I say small I mean maybe 1-100 thousand?? just guessing here). The 'copyright vortex effect' . Sites that didn't get a lot of traffic really wouldn't be worth spidering but sites that got a lot of traffic would be. Joe Nobody steals some pics and makes an i-love-jenna website but he doesn't submit to the high traffic TGPs/lists and only gets a little bit of traffic. The bot never knows about Joe Nobody. But Fred Riches steals some pics and submits them all around town hoping to make a million overnight. The bot would probably find Fred.

roadtrip, if you're still reading this thread, do you mind me asking how robust your brand is to scaling, shearing and rotation? Ultimately if the image has to be significantly degraded to get rid of the brand then the image would no longer be usefull and everybody is happy except the thief.

Digimarc has some watermarking and digital id technologies but I don't believe that they withstand rotation and scaling very well.

cheers

roadtrip

Scaling and shearing haven't been a problem.

To be honest, it never occured to me to rotate the
image!

I developed the system orginally for a live java jpeg
stream system. It was encoded at 320x240x16m,
branded, sent across the net at 18fps, interpolated
to 640x480x16m and displayed. Both sized images
ofcoarse retained the branding... but I never thought
to rotate and take a read. (I could blew the browser
up all I wanted if someone tried to save and image,
but the client wanted a watermark too.)

It would still contain the branding, it would just
have to be read based on the new orientation of
the jpeg blocks.

THANKS! A project is born for my bus trip between
the strip clubs this weekend.

linkrotator

GREED IS RECESSION PROOF!

YOU CANT STOP CONTENT THEFT!

YOU WILL NEVER EVEN SLOW IT DOWN!

When you exploit people and show them naked for your own greed and livelyhood, you get what you deserve.

It isnt like you invented a new kind of peanut butter.

You sell sex over and over and over and since the model always gets screwed, its only fair that you do too eventually )

Its part of the game... in 5 years, I never once complained.
Why should I?? I sit home in my pajamas and make money off of some dumb porn models who are too stupid to think ahead.

I have no right to bitch about anything

Pipecrew

Dude, you were just complaining about losing your house over 500 dollars, so shutup

funkmaster

"I sit home in my pajamas and make money off of some ..."

... yeppa, and next week you´ll be whatching your house from the outside ... usless piece of shit !!!

jimmyf

Waht some of you have said sounds like a web bug... or just about the same thing if not the same....

I have my ZoneAlarm set to block Web Bugs..
So I wouldn't be able to look at your
fuck pictures....

Go do a search for web bugs... and you'll find all kinds of ideals...

What you saying won't work....

Although the FBI uses Web Bugs to catch Pedo's
and people that download pre-teen or CP shit from NewsGroups...

__________________
Epic CashEpic Cash works for me
Solar Cash Paysite Plugin
Gallery of the day freesites,POTD,Gallery generator with free hosting

Kimmykim

Personally I think if you bust the thieves in the head with a ball bat, they'd probably consider not doing it again.

spanky

Not a web bug. Ideally I'd say that any copyright protection on the client side is doomed to failure. Too easy to circumvent and too many privacy issues. I would completely agree with you about web bugs.

What I was talking about was a steganographic signal embedded in the image that is robust enough to withstand normal image transformations. Nothing more than an invisible watermark that could be detected by a bot. Nothing to do with the clients or surfers browsing the internet.

cheers