# Why NOT Save Pen Photos to the Site?



## SteveG

After way too long, I will finally be getting to the point of posting pen photos here, and have a question. It appears many members post their photos by providing a link, instead of saving the file to the site. I wonder why that is? I have seen the discussion that if the file is sitting somewhere else, that file may be moved or deleted, making it unavailable for viewing here. Any thoughts, or is it just a personal preference?
Thanks
Steve


----------



## mredburn

It was easier for me to control the size of the picture in the thread and to add the picture at the point I wanted in the description of the build/developement of the pen.  Jeff has since added a tutorial on how to do that in the library from an uploaded picture.


----------



## 76winger

I don't know the answer to your question, but only what I do. I first figured out how to upload my photos to Shop Shots and Members Photo Albums. Then after I started participating in some discussions, I figured out how to click on the "Images" link in advanced editing and attach the photos I had previously posted. So that's how I started doing it and continue to do it.

I've since discovered the "Manage Attachments" link below the editing session in the Additional Options area. It allows you to upload your images and attach them directly to the message, but I think they're only available for the one message and are limited to 800x600 resolution or 256k size, so I don't like that option as well. The method above allows a larger image, so I don't always have to edit and re-size them just to add them to a message.

I don't know much about displaying images that reside on other sites. I've tried a couple times to point to one or another of my photos on Flickr or Facebook, but have never had luck with it.


----------



## InvisibleMan

I have my own site where I publish photos of my pens.  It is quite easy and fast for me to copy a link to that site.  It takes more time and effort for me to save photos here.

Personally, I tend to like linked photos from other posters as well.  They are large and I don't have to click on a thumb to see them.


----------



## Curly

My preference is to have the pictures posted to the thread on this site. If for any reason the poster pulls their pictures from another hosting site, they drop their own website or their heirs do, the thread can become useless. The other problem with offsite is that in the case of someone looking at the thread from work, hopefully on their break,  may not be able to see them if the companies security settings are set high. Just ask Skiprat about that problem.  When I post pictures on a forum it is so you can see them forever, not for a few years.


----------



## JD Combs Sr

Curly said:


> My preference is to have the pictures posted to the thread on this site. If for any reason the poster pulls their pictures from another hosting site, they drop their own website or their heirs do, the thread can become useless. The other problem with offsite is that in the case of someone looking at the thread from work, hopefully on their break,  may not be able to see them if the companies security settings are set high. Just ask Skiprat about that problem.  When I post pictures on a forum it is so you can see them forever, not for a few years.


+1 for what Curly said.  Several times I have been perusing some of the older threads and found an interesting one with "dead" photo links.  I always up load mine to the thread, however, I haven't tried it but linking to a photo in and IAP user gallery will probably stay long term.  BTW if the pic size you are uploading is below a certain size(not sure what it is) it will auto re-size to below the size limit after the upload.


----------



## SteveG

Having thought about the feedback from this thread,I am leaning toward bringing my photos into the forum. So I will be working on figuring out that process. Oh, and I will also working on how to use my new Nikon D3200! :biggrin: Thanks everyone. If there are any other thoughts on the subject, let's hear them


----------



## edstreet

Lets break this down into parts:

Deleting files offsite and not showing up here.  If you host it here and delete it then well same thing happens.

Why host offsite?  Simple, some sites wants to see 1,600x images.  The tiny 800x max lacks significant detail and this is not the only place that may want to see the info.  By uploading here you just threw into the mix one more place to upload the image to.  There is the trickle down format that places like gravatar uses.  You set *ONE* image and all sites link to that.  Instead of changing every site individually you just change one site and it's all done.  The other issue on this is restricting editing of the message is a very fallacy policy as things do change, corrections may need to be made and allowing the user to change the message in the future does allow for updated images, links and the like to be fixed, which they are more likely to be if allowed to.

Security settings at work restrict viewing:  If you are browing at work and you find yourself being blocked or partially blocked then odd's are you are doing something that you should NOT be doing.  Work is work and does not mean browse IAP time   This is why companies put restrictions on in the first place.  To try to curve non-work activity in hopes of productivity,  as for the validity of that subject that is a whole new topic in itself.

Copyright, watermark usage, digital signature.  Many photo's are now using these features for various reasons I wish not to get into.  Hosting onsite poses a great number of liability risk when dealing with these images.  Say you have one image and you post it to 10 locations.  Each mandates you upload the image there and the site resizes it.  Now say your copyright info changes so you have to correct not just 10 sites but every variation of images ever used (exponential).

Ghost images:  Odds are if a photo is deleted offsite then it's not that good to begin with.  Good photo's last forever, crap low quality low resolution photo's fade into nothing very quickly.

Another issue is if you want to delete a photo for whatever reason do you really want to delete the image from 10+ locations or would you rather delete it from 1 location and all linked sites to update from that?

This is likely going to offend some/many by what I have said and that is not my goal.  Nor was it my goal to sugar coat the topic.

Ed


----------



## airborne_r6

I don't upload most of my pictures here because there is no way for me to organize the pictures here.  If there was the capability to create albums within my individual album so I could more easily organize and find pictures I have uploaded I would upload them here.


----------



## Scruffy

*Providing a photo in the thread allows ..*

continuity.  I find that offsite links interrupt the thread and may distract the user into browsing the site rather than returning. Isolated links which allow a new widow to be modal and limited display are not totally supported.

Requiring someone to visit a proprietary or personal just to view a photo is like interrupting a conversation. If someone provides only a link, then the moderators lose control of what is displayed.  Some people can even change a photo after the link has been established.

I Very seldom will follow a link just to see a photo.  Obviously, it was not intended as part of a group activity, but one based solely on personal activity.

I prefer photos in the body of the thread.  They will remain for future research by interested members.


----------



## BigShed

I routinely use off site photos for 2 reasons:

1 I post on two main pen forums, sometimes 3. I post on one of my main forums (in Oz) and can copy that post in its' entirety on this site, pictures and all.
Even though they come from an off-site photo hosting site they are seen as photos here and not as links you need to click on to see them.

2 That brings me to the second reason, it is very easy and intuitive to place the photos where I want them within the text where they are most relevant.
Having thumbnails at the bottom of the thread, particularly if the text runs off the screen really breaks the flow of the narrative.

The off-site photo hosting I use most is Picasa Web Albums, which also doubles as my catalogue of pens I have made and I can easily show them to a prospective client to select the various options, or indeed just to brag!:biggrin: 
I have in the past also used Photobucket, but since using Picasa as my main photo cataloguing and editing software it is very easy to upload any photos to my web albums with just a single click.

One day I will set up my own website and then that will be my main source for my pen photos that may be shown here.


----------



## Sylvanite

BigShed said:


> ..., it is very easy and intuitive to place the photos where I want them within the text where they are most relevant.
> Having thumbnails at the bottom of the thread, particularly if the text runs off the screen really breaks the flow of the narrative.


Using the [attach] or [img] tags, you can easily place thumbnails or full-size versions of uploaded images anywhere you want within your post.

Regards,
Eric


----------



## skiprat

Don't forget that by off site hosting ( ie; not on IAP ) then you are limiting the audience of your peers for comments and feedback by members like me that have company machines with preset security. 
We simply can't see pics that are on 'no-photo?-stuff it!'. ( That's what I think when I start to read a post and then see that the pics are on photobucket etc ):biggrin:


----------



## edstreet

[QUOTE="Sylvanite;1543481"  [Using the


----------



## edstreet

skiprat said:


> Don't forget that by off site hosting ( ie; not on IAP ) then you are limiting the audience of your peers for comments and feedback by members like me that have company machines with preset security.
> We simply can't see pics that are on 'no-photo?-stuff it!'. ( That's what I think when I start to read a post and then see that the pics are on photobucket etc ):biggrin:



This include offsite hosting that has more viewers than IAP?  

The recent photos that I have posted were you able to view them?


----------



## Sylvanite

edstreet said:


> So do double work then use the same IMG tag?  There is more cons than pros to adding double work.


Let's see,... The effort to write the text is the same, regardless of where your photo is hosted.  The [img] tag takes the same effort.  If you already host your photo offsite, then the extra work to upload to IAP is:
Click the "Manage Attachments" button.
Paste the url of your photo into the "upload file from a url" box.
Click "Upload".
Click on the link to the just uploaded picture.
Copy the url 
Click the "back" button of your browser.
Now you're ready to continue editing, just as you were before.  That's 5 clicks, one <Ctrl><V>, and one <Ctrl><C>.

If that's more work then you're willing to invest in posting your photo, then fine, host offsite.

Personally, I don't believe the effort is that much of a difference.  There are _real_, functional  differences between on-site and off-site hosting (pro and con for each) that are more important.

Regards,
Eric


----------



## edstreet

Sylvanite said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> 
> So do double work then use the same IMG tag?  There is more cons than pros to adding double work.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see,... The effort to write the text is the same, regardless of where your photo is hosted.  The [img] tag takes the same effort.  If you already host your photo offsite, then the extra work to upload to IAP is:
> Click the "Manage Attachments" button.
> Paste the url of your photo into the "upload file from a url" box.
> Click "Upload".
> Click on the link to the just uploaded picture.
> Copy the url
> Click the "back" button of your browser.
> Now you're ready to continue editing, just as you were before.  That's 5 clicks, one <Ctrl><V>, and one <Ctrl><C>.
> 
> If that's more work then you're willing to invest in posting your photo, then fine, host offsite.
> 
> Personally, I don't believe the effort is that much of a difference.  There are _real_, functional  differences between on-site and off-site hosting (pro and con for each) that are more important.
> 
> Regards,
> Eric
Click to expand...



it's more like:
Upload to hosting site A
Create thread on forum B with img links to hosting site A.
Create thread on forum C with img links to hosting site A.


- vs -
Upload to hosting site A
Upload image on forum B.
Create thread on forum B with img links to site B.
Upload image on forum C.
Create thread on forum C with img links to site C.

This is double uploading and double entry for the text that is posted.


----------



## jsolie

I post photos on several different forums, not all of them related to pen turning.  Not all forums use the same methods.  One photography forum doesn't allow attachments at all.

However, the one method that does work regardless of forum software is to embed the image link inside of the IMG tags.

I've used SmugMug for years, mainly for my photography work, and am used to working with it.  I can get different sizes for different forums.  Some forums don't want large pictures, so a 600px wide photo is considered large.  On others, people post 1200px wide photos.  Some people can't figure it out at all and post full resolution photos (which can be a bummer if the person has a 20+ megapixel dslr!).  I've also found that SmugMug gets past more filters than PhotoBucket, probably because they don't offer a free service.

I am more used to images posted with the IMG tag, rather than attachments.  I don't have a problem with either.  Like pen turning and Photoshop, there are many right ways to do things.


----------



## jeff

For several reasons, I prefer photos to be uploaded here. Recognizing that many people don't particularly care what I prefer, we have never restricted that to be the only method.


----------



## edstreet

jeff said:


> For several reasons, I prefer photos to be uploaded here. Recognizing that many people don't particularly care what I prefer, we have never restricted that to be the only method.



Perhaps I am understanding this wrong but I have not seen anyone mention or hint they don't care what you prefer.  However I would like to hear your side of things on this topic.


----------



## jeff

edstreet said:


> jeff said:
> 
> 
> 
> For several reasons, I prefer photos to be uploaded here. Recognizing that many people don't particularly care what I prefer, we have never restricted that to be the only method.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I am understanding this wrong but I have not seen anyone mention or hint they don't care what you prefer.  However I would like to hear your side of things on this topic.
Click to expand...


Did I say anyone mentioned it? I simply recognize that not everyone shares my preferences. Some people prefer to host their photos off-site and it's not worth making a hard and fast rule that requires otherwise. 

My side of things is that I don't like broken image links, whether they are intentional or accidental. The only way to control that is to have photos hosted here.


----------



## Wraith

For me the amount of effort needed to upload the image at the time you are creating the post is so minimal I don't understand why anyone wouldn't. I post on two different boards at this time and I upload the images to each.

When it comes to posts that have links to images, do bother looking at the images. It breaks the flow to much. I don't even like it when the post has a thumbnail with a link the the image I. The IAP photo albums for the same reason. I prefer the embedded images.

MHO,
Brian


----------



## BigShed

Sylvanite said:


> BigShed said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..., it is very easy and intuitive to place the photos where I want them within the text where they are most relevant.
> Having thumbnails at the bottom of the thread, particularly if the text runs off the screen really breaks the flow of the narrative.
> 
> 
> 
> Using the [attach] or [img] tags, you can easily place thumbnails or full-size versions of uploaded images anywhere you want within your post.
> 
> Regards,
> Eric
Click to expand...


Yep, that is exactly how I do it.

Only have to do this on the first forum, create the text and the images (with 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 links) and save it to that forum.

I can now highlight that post in its' entirety, text and images, and do a ctrl-C to copy it, go to the second forum, hit new thread, do a ctrl-V to paste the whole post, text and images, in to tha post, voila I have created 2 threads on 2 forums with very little extra work, photos are full size within the text on both.

Now, I am retired and I don't view forums on my employers' computer network (and maybe I shouldn't anyway?) so I can't say whether my pics are visible to the people that do that.

As someone else remarked, maybe those employers have those restrictions in place for a reason?

Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.


----------



## jeff

BigShed said:


> snip...
> 
> Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.



Your statement is incorrect. 

You don't lose your copyright just because you upload something here. There is nothing in our Terms of Service which constitutes a transfer of copyright on your images. Just because it says "Content Copyright..." doesn't mean that you are transferring *your* copyright to us. Nowhere in our TOS or elsewhere does it say that.  When you upload content here, you simply grant us a distribution right so that we can display it.


----------



## edstreet

Here,

17 USC § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use




> Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
> (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
> (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
> (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
> (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
> The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.


----------



## jeff

edstreet said:


> Here,
> 
> 17 USC § 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
> (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
> (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
> (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
> (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
> The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Click to expand...


What does this have to do with anything we are discussing?


----------



## edstreet

jeff said:


> BigShed said:
> 
> 
> 
> snip...
> 
> Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your statement is incorrect.
> 
> You don't lose your copyright just because you upload something here. There is nothing in our Terms of Service which constitutes a transfer of copyright on your images. Just because it says "Content Copyright..." doesn't mean that you are transferring *your* copyright to us. Nowhere in our TOS or elsewhere does it say that.  When you upload content here, you simply grant us a distribution right so that we can display it.
Click to expand...


^^^^   This


----------



## jeff

edstreet said:


> jeff said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BigShed said:
> 
> 
> 
> snip...
> 
> Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your statement is incorrect.
> 
> You don't lose your copyright just because you upload something here. There is nothing in our Terms of Service which constitutes a transfer of copyright on your images. Just because it says "Content Copyright..." doesn't mean that you are transferring *your* copyright to us. Nowhere in our TOS or elsewhere does it say that.  When you upload content here, you simply grant us a distribution right so that we can display it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ^^^^   This
Click to expand...


Fair Use doctrine has absolutely no bearing on this circumstance. Really, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the relinquishment of rights because an image was uploaded to our forum. Our TOS has very specific language which enables us to publish (i.e. display as forum content) member submitted content, but it in no way transfers copyright from the owner to us. That requires a wet-signed contract.

Potentially, someone could decide to use an image the found here in some way, in which case Fair Use could come into consideration if a challenge to the use were undertaken, but that would be an issue between the copyright owner and the user.


----------



## BigShed

jeff said:


> BigShed said:
> 
> 
> 
> snip...
> 
> Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your statement is incorrect.
> 
> You don't lose your copyright just because you upload something here. There is nothing in our Terms of Service which constitutes a transfer of copyright on your images. Just because it says "Content Copyright..." doesn't mean that you are transferring *your* copyright to us. Nowhere in our TOS or elsewhere does it say that.  When you upload content here, you simply grant us a distribution right so that we can display it.
Click to expand...


But that is not what it says at the bottom of this forums' home page (or indeed other forums). I cannot see that there can be dual copyright on an image, the copyright belongs either to the original producer or to the forum. There is no mention of distribution rights there.


----------



## edstreet

Technically we are both saying the same thing but going at it differently.

Fair use act *DOES* cover display of images for viewing use.


> for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright



Inline Links and the Public display right: Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation


----------



## jeff

BigShed said:


> jeff said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BigShed said:
> 
> 
> 
> snip...
> 
> Could I also mention, and I haven't seen this commented on before, that if I uploaded the images to each site I lose copyright of my images. If you look at the bottom of most forums, this one included, ALL content is copyright of that forum. Not a big deal for me, but it could be for other people, particularly those that run a business and use those pics on their websites etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your statement is incorrect.
> 
> You don't lose your copyright just because you upload something here. There is nothing in our Terms of Service which constitutes a transfer of copyright on your images. Just because it says "Content Copyright..." doesn't mean that you are transferring *your* copyright to us. Nowhere in our TOS or elsewhere does it say that.  When you upload content here, you simply grant us a distribution right so that we can display it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But that is not what it says at the bottom of this forums' home page (or indeed other forums). I cannot see that there can be dual copyright on an image, the copyright belongs either to the original producer or to the forum. There is no mention of distribution rights there.
Click to expand...


Our copyright on content does not imply that we own the copyright on ALL content. Unless there is a properly executed contract for the transfer of copyright, the copyright owner still owns the copyright no matter where the work appears. Not a single word in our terms of service attempts to (or could!)  transfer copyright from creator to penturners.org. That requires a signed contract. 

Think of it this way; I write a book. You give me the right to use your copyrighted work in my book. Maybe free, maybe for compensation. That does not mean I OWN the copyright. It simply means that we have negotiated a means (a license) for me to USE the work in my publication. I hold the copyright on the book, but not your work contained therein.

In our case, the Terms of Service conveys the right (a license) to publish the work (i.e. display the content to anyone looking at our web site.) It DOES NOT transfer copyright from you to us. 

I don't know how to explain this more clearly.


----------



## jeff

edstreet said:


> Technically we are both saying the same thing but going at it differently.
> 
> Fair use act *DOES* cover display of images for viewing use.
> 
> 
> 
> for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inline Links and the Public display right: Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation
Click to expand...


We are not saying the same thing. One does not CONVEY the right of fair use. It is doctrine developed over decades of legal wrangling. 

Read the terms of service. Members grant us a license to use. That is not fair use, it is a license.

Why are we in these weeds? What does it have to do with the original issue?


----------



## edstreet

jeff said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> 
> Technically we are both saying the same thing but going at it differently.
> 
> Fair use act *DOES* cover display of images for viewing use.
> 
> 
> 
> for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inline Links and the Public display right: Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not saying the same thing. One does not CONVEY the right of fair use. It is doctrine developed over decades of legal wrangling.
> 
> Read the terms of service. Members grant us a license to use. That is not fair use, it is a license.
> 
> Why are we in these weeds? What does it have to do with the original issue?
Click to expand...


that is not what the federal courts said in the link I posted.


----------



## jeff

edstreet said:


> jeff said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> 
> Technically we are both saying the same thing but going at it differently.
> 
> Fair use act *DOES* cover display of images for viewing use.
> 
> 
> 
> for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inline Links and the Public display right: Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not saying the same thing. One does not CONVEY the right of fair use. It is doctrine developed over decades of legal wrangling.
> 
> Read the terms of service. Members grant us a license to use. That is not fair use, it is a license.
> 
> Why are we in these weeds? What does it have to do with the original issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> that is not what the federal courts said in the link I posted.
Click to expand...


Do you see the sentence in the opening paragraph of the opinion which says "Some of these images are located on Kelly's web site or other web sites with which Kelly has a license agreement."? 

The key point is license agreement.

Our TOS, and the agreement thereto which members effect when they join, constitutes a license agreement. It has absolutely nothing to do with Fair Use.


----------



## edstreet

BigShed said:


> But that is not what it says at the bottom of this forums' home page (or indeed other forums). I cannot see that there can be dual copyright on an image, the copyright belongs either to the original producer or to the forum. There is no mention of distribution rights there.




I just looked and there are several things that possibly was over looked.

First we have this:


> Intellectual Property: It is the policy of Penturners.org to respond expeditiously to claims of intellectual property infringement. Penturners.org will promptly process and investigate notices of alleged infringement and will take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). Should a violation of intellectual property be discovered, the document(s) or messages in such violation will be removed in a timely manner after any and all investigating has been completed to prove the authenticity of such a claim. See our Copyright Policy for procedures for filing a Notice of Copyright Infringement.
> 
> Limitation of Re-Use: The content available through the Service is the property of Penturners.org and its licensors and is protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents or other proprietary rights and laws. Content received through the Service may be displayed, reformatted and printed for your personal, non-commercial use only. You agree not to reproduce, retransmit, re-post, distribute, sell, publish, broadcast, create derivative works from, perform, or in any way commercially exploit any of the content, or infringe upon trademarks or service marks displayed or received through the Service, including but not limited to others in the same company or organization, without the express prior written consent of Penturners.org. The one exception to this is occasional reposting of a message board post to another message board, provided that a link to the original post is provided.




Then couple that with this:


> Member Conduct: You may not use any part of the Service to transmit material that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable, or which infringes upon the intellectual property, contractual, or fiduciary rights of others.



The TOS mentions copyright material that the USERS hold and other copyright materials that the SITE holds.  This is not dual copyrights on an image.

Note for this use 'content' could have several meanings.

Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.

Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work. 

U.S. Copyright Office - What Does Copyright Protect? (FAQ)

Also worth noting is this.



> The Copyright Act grants five rights to a copyright owner, which are described in more detail below.
> 
> the right to reproduce the copyrighted work;
> the right to prepare derivative works based upon the work;
> the right to distribute copies of the work to the public;
> the right to perform the copyrighted work publicly; and
> the right to display the copyrighted work publicly.
> 
> The rights are not without limit, however, as they are specifically limited by "fair use" and several other specific limitations set forth in the Copyright Act



Rights Granted Under Copyright Law (BitLaw)


----------



## airborne_r6

Well this thread went to ****.


----------



## keithbyrd

Everybody could have posted dozens of pictures either here on on another website in the time it takes to read the posts! 
Jeff set the system to allow for both - do whichever one suits your fancy!


----------

