I Really Wish I Didn't Have To Do This

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.hi-pda.com/' target='_blank'>http://www.hi-pda.com/</a><br /><br /></div>Those of you who read my post about <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/index.php?topic_id=5344">Webmasters from high-traffic sites linking to images on our server</a> may have been wondering which site I was talking about. I contacted this site twice, waited 48 hours for them to respond, and decided today that I had to act.<br /><br />The site in question is <a href="http://www.hi-pda.com">Hi-PDA.com.</a> They appear to be a very popular mobile devices site - the image they linked to was loaded 5229 times yesterday. Although I could have broken the link, I wanted to send a message to the Webmaster who was ignoring my messages - I wasn't rude about it, but I did make my statement. Go look. 8)

[pt]

you did all you could, you took the high road here too, you're a good egg jason.

cheers,
pt

[GoldKey]

You were much nicer about it than I would have been! Since the page is not in English, wonder if most of the visitors will be able to read what it says. Lets take bets on how long until they fix it. I say 24 hours.

[dochall]

Now perhaps you could persuade Jorgen to do the same (they have an infosync image directly linked as well).

Only about 20% of their photos appear to actually be hosted by the site.

[GoldKey]

Now perhaps you could persuade Jorgen to do the same (they have an infosync image directly linked as well).

Only about 20% of their photos appear to actually be hosted by the site.

I noticed that too. But some of those are hosted from the manufacturer of the product. Since they are plugging the product, thats not AS bad.

[Ed Hansberry]

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too tame. :wink: :twisted:

[Daimaou]

Indeed HI-PDA is VERY popular among Chinese PDA community. I understand why U got such PB. I hope that they will act soon (Hope for you) but...

[entropy1980]

Way too nice I would have been way crazier ... but to the point none-the-less... :twisted:

[Steven Cedrone]

Way too nice I would have been way crazier ... but to the point none-the-less... :twisted:

I agree, sometimes I think you are just too darned nice! :wink:

Steve

[farnold]

Those of you who read my post about Webmasters from high-traffic sites linking to images on our server (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/index.php?topic_id=5344) may have been wondering which site I was talking about.
A few weeks ago I found a shop in Indonesia selling PocketPC and using not just pictures but the complete wording of reviews TEKGURU posted on his page stating it as their review. It took an entire week until they removed it! I think a number of people in Asia have a very different understanding of copyright...

[Newsboy]

Nice! Way to go Jason! My only suggestion might be...translate in BabelFish and post it in Chinese? :D

[vincentsiaw]

i like your action jason.... way to go !!

[Pocket PC Pontificator]

Jason ~

"behaviour"? Is that the Canadian spelling? 8O Otherwise, well said. :D


~ Geoffrey

[T-Will]

Anyone else having a little trouble getting to hi-pda.com?

[VanHlebar]

:way to go:

Now that is WAY to funny!!

Nice job!

-Eric

[markan]

"behaviour" is simply the correct spelling :wink:

[blade_of_narsil]

If they don't fix it in 24 hours I say that you let the camera enthusiast in you out and let em see a nice close up of your butt. :) Then those that don't speak english could get the idea of what you were saying. That is just not right of them to steal that kind of bandwidth.

[Duncan]

Heh! It's about time someone did this to Hi-PDA - good stuff! It's a simple rule of thumb after all - linkin direct to manufacturers images is fine (after all it is free advertising) but linking to another enthusiast site is just rude!

Newsboy - if Jason translates it via BabelFish it could come out saying anything - Jason might inadvertently call someone's grandmother a bicycle... :)

Oh and I'm with markan - 'behaviour' is absolutely correct - just you Americans that insist on dropping your 'u's! :wink:

[Ed Hansberry]

Jason ~

"behaviour"? Is that the Canadian spelling? 8O Otherwise, well said. :D
It would seem Canada has an excess inventory of the letter "u" and they spread it around. So you get words like behaviour and colour. :wink: :lol:

[kagayaki1]

Amazing, Hi-PDA's site is REALLY slow right now. Response times on a general ping are about 227 ms, with half dropping off completely.

-Jason

[Kati Compton]

It would seem Canada has an excess inventory of the letter "u" and they spread it around. So you get words like behaviour and colour. :wink: :lol:

Perhaps they should donate them to the languages that are seriously lacking in vowels....

[kagayaki1]

It would seem Canada has an excess inventory of the letter "u" and they spread it around. So you get words like behaviour and colour. :wink: :lol:

Perhaps they should donate them to the languages that are seriously lacking in vowels....

LOL, well said. Whatever your language, I sympathize and support your point, Jason. Nice touching up of the image. Wonder if there's a Thoughts reader who could do it in Chinese for you...

-Jason

[bdegroodt]

Excellent! Although, I concur Jason. Far too nice. At least you know the culprit. I think the butt cam would be a fair next escalation point.

[Tari Akpodiete]

well, as you honestly confessed, Jason, you too used to link to images on other people's sites. it's always interesting when the shoe is on the other foot. anyway, this is an ongoing problem all over the web. and not just for images. it can be a real nightmare, when like me, you have files that are 5 to 15 megs (videos) each. bandwidth theft can be quite a trying and expensive experience. and please note (to the person who brought it up) that it is not just people in Asia who are doing this naughty behaviour. it happens in the west, including good old North America as well.

[Wes Salmon]

Without overly profiling people based on nationality, I will say that when I ran a popular PDA site, almost all of my image theft, copyright violations, and other stealing of content came from sites in a very concentrated part of the world. It is for this reason that I don't find this thing surprising at all. *sigh*

[ThomasC22]

Wow, that guy is all over the place too! look at his other images, almost none of them are hosted on his site...sad really.

I see you finally did resort to the image swap as well btw, I think it was a good idea, very tasteful, no grotesque pictures and such.

Although, and not that it would cause me to go back or anything, but I did find the Palm watch a little interesting on that page btw (luckily I knew where to go for more info since that image too, was not hosted locally) ;)

[njskater]

:cry:
In fact there has a forum in this site.I think those visitors of the forum linked pics directly or indirectly. i am the one who often visit their forum,too.You should know many Chinese don't know English well so i will inform this matter in their forum.Sorry for the trouble! :wink:

[sponge]

If I was in your situation, I'd probably replace the picture with everyone's.. favorite.. goat related site. *cough*

It WOULD get them to stop very quickly.

[hkpocketpc]

I have already done that this morning. I have post a message using Mark_T_HK as my log-in name.

A reader from Hong Kong

:cry:
In fact there has a forum in this site.I think those visitors of the forum linked pics directly or indirectly. i am the one who often visit their forum,too.You should know many Chinese don't know English well so i will inform this matter in their forum.Sorry for the trouble! :wink:

[Janak Parekh]

well, as you honestly confessed, Jason, you too used to link to images on other people's sites. it's always interesting when the shoe is on the other foot.
True, but by the same token, Jason did ask politely and kept the tone of the message very professional. I think he fully recognizes that blog owners don't initally realize the implications of free linking.

--bdj

[mookie123]

Without overly profiling people based on nationality, I will say that when I ran a popular PDA site, almost all of my image theft, copyright violations, and other stealing of content came from sites in a very concentrated part of the world. It is for this reason that I don't find this thing surprising at all. *sigh*

Well PDAbuzz is also known to liberally take pictures and refuse to take down some item hiding behind "anon" posting excuse despite request otherwise.

Let's not pointing fingers, eh?

[ThomasC22]

OK, before this turns into a flame war lets keep a few things in mind here...

1 - I think everyone who has owned any kind of web site has practiced image linking at least once in their life so pointing fingers saying "you did it too!" is kind of pointless. Which leads me to...

2 - Jason specifically did this because THIS PATICULAR site is a high-bandwidth site. Now, going back to 1, although we've all probably image linked in the past you get to a point where your bandwidth is such that you have to either (A) find a way to pay to host your own images or (B) shut down your site. I personally believe this line is drawn somewhere around the time when you start getting paid by advertisers.

3 - Remember, this isn't a case of someone who used linked images, this is the case of someone who used linked images, was asked to stop by the web site that they were taking them from, and refused (or at least ignored the request). There is a difference.

4 - Attacking each other accomplishes nothing.

5 - I'm getting E-Mail notifications again (just thought I'd throw that in)

[Sheynk]

Oh man, just got back home and read thoughts.....that was awesome!!! just about the coolest thing I've thing a person do on the net. ......Evil ideas popping into my head..he he

Great Job!

[Kirkaiya]

Without overly profiling people based on nationality, I will say that when I ran a popular PDA site, almost all of my image theft, copyright violations, and other stealing of content came from sites in a very concentrated part of the world. It is for this reason that I don't find this thing surprising at all. *sigh*

Hey, where have YOU been hiding!!?? (yeah, I know, wessalmon.com... but anyway, Hey You!!)

Back on topic - I only read the first few posts (violating my own "read the whole thread 1st), when I thought of the Babelfish thing (in addition, it seems, to everybody else).

So, I went and made this:
http://www.nulogik.com/images/hipdatheft.gif

Can one of the Chinese-speaking forum-readers here satisfy my curiousity about BabelFish's English->Chinese translation? ( i dumbed down the language a bit, to avoid confusing it...)

Anyway - That was a pretty measured response, Jason. If that's what your mean side is like, you are like, waaaaay nicer than me.

[szamot]

ping, ping, ping, ping, pinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng wow they are really slow.

Jason Nice Guys Finish with fat bandwidth bills. You are far too nice.

[njskater]

haha,this translation is a little bit werid,but i can understand the basic meaning.
pretty good,dude

[Jason Dunn]

Now perhaps you could persuade Jorgen to do the same (they have an infosync image directly linked as well). Only about 20% of their photos appear to actually be hosted by the site.

I informed Jorgen and Dale about their linking, but how they deal with it is up to them. :-)

They host very few of their own images. I can understand them linking to Socket's site for Socket images, but linking to an enthusiast site isn't fair - it's not like we're benefitting from the bandwidth drain by selling a product.

[Duncan]

Well - it's gone now...

[Wes Salmon]

Well PDAbuzz is also known to liberally take pictures and refuse to take down some item hiding behind "anon" posting excuse despite request otherwise.

Let's not pointing fingers, eh?

Who was pointing fingers, I was simply stating a fact of what happened to me over my years of running a PDA site. You on the other hand are handing out vague, unsubstantiated claims that really add nothing to the discussion.

[mookie123]

Who was pointing fingers, I was simply stating a fact of what happened to me over my years of running a PDA site. You on the other hand are handing out vague, unsubstantiated claims that really add nothing to the discussion.

OK, if you say so. I am sure what you say is true.
have a nice day.

[Jason Dunn]

Well, I'd like to clear a few things up:

1) This is not me being nasty - this is me being as nice as a possibly can. I've realized that the Mobile Device community is a small place, and making enemies gains me nothing. Trust me, my first instict was to get very angry, but I have to keep reminding myself that anger is of the dark side...or something like that. :wink:

2) Yes Tari, I used to link to other sites. I think it's natural that any blog does - we're small, and we always link back to the original source, right? But my point was that as a site grows, there comes a time when the site owner needs to realize that they have too much traffic to link to someone else's images. Like I said in the post, there are dozens of sites (if not 100's) that link to my images. They're mostly small, the impact is minimal, and I'm totally cool with it. Large sites should host their own images, period. :-)

3) I just had a 20 minute chat with Zhuyi, the owner of Hi-PDA, and it's all good. :D It's front page post time...

[yunez]

so, what did you do jason? i missed it

[mgd]

Jason ~

"behaviour"? Is that the Canadian spelling? 8O Otherwise, well said. :D
It would seem Canada has an excess inventory of the letter "u" and they spread it around. So you get words like behaviour and colour. :wink: :lol:

Yeah, but don't you think that a rooster is a bit complicated when a cock will do?

[StoneRoses]

I also run a mid-sized PPC community website (about 1,000 unique hit per day). I have to admit that I also linked the image from other website. (including my favourite; pocketpcthoughts.com)

I like the way Jason did in this case and I will strictly comply. But sometimes, users in our discussion forum post the linked images on the forum. I hope you allow this type of posting.

[Pony99CA]

well, as you honestly confessed, Jason, you too used to link to images on other people's sites. it's always interesting when the shoe is on the other foot. anyway, this is an ongoing problem all over the web. and not just for images. it can be a real nightmare, when like me, you have files that are 5 to 15 megs (videos) each. bandwidth theft can be quite a trying and expensive experience.

I think "theft" is a bit strong. The Web was created for linking, so lots of people do it without realizing the implications of these links. I'm a software developer, but wouldn't have thought of the consequences of image linking.

In fact, I'd have thought that linking to the original site was a courtesy, especially if it increased their hit counters. Copying the images, even if you gave credit, could be a copyright violation, too.

I think Jason's attitude was correct -- it's OK for small sites, but not for big sites, and notifying the Web master first is a reasonable courtesy. If I were that Web master, I'd have appreciated his approach, and learned something, too.

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

Yeah, but don't you think that a rooster is a bit complicated when a cock will do?
They are all just chickens to us Southerners. Fried, baked, grilled, Bar-B-Q'd, whatever. Yum! Pass me a leg.

[rlobrecht]

There's an obvious article about Pocket Pc Thoughts on the front page of Hi PDA. Can anyone read it?

[Tari Akpodiete]

actually, the correct term IS 'bandwidth theft'. i didn't make it up. check google and yahoo, and you'll see.

and it doesn't matter what size your site/blog/whatever is. in fact, saying that your site is small is justifying what you're doing, and that's always a hallmark of knowing that you're doing something you shouldn't be.

plus, 'small' is in the eye of the beholder. not to point fingers, but to put it in perspetive: i remember that i was impressed to hear that Jason was getting 12 000 unique visitors per day. and other sites which practice this nefarious act get even more.

if 25 000 visitors a day download a page that has a 15k picture linked from someone else's site, well, that is making bills for someone. or if you link to a 5 meg video on someone's server and 1 000 visitors to your site download it - same thing: free content for you, bandwidth bills for someone else.

anyway, no excuses: you should download the image (video file, whatever) and put it on your server. and it would be nice if you asked first, or at least gave credit where credit is due. or you could direct your visitors to the other site.

i'm also not attacking anyone, so there is no need for anyone to get outraged or get defensive. i'm just making a few very valid points about a serious problem.

oddly enough, it occured to me that maybe the guy didn't get the message, or maybe he didn't read English. i was going to mention that in my first post, but i then i thought that was just too obvious. of course, as it turns out, he didn't get the message. sometimes the obvious is the obvious.

[ThomasC22]

actually, the correct term IS 'bandwidth theft'. i didn't make it up. check google and yahoo, and you'll see.

and it doesn't matter what size your site/blog/whatever is. in fact, saying that your site is small is justifying what you're doing, and that's always a hallmark of knowing that you're doing something you shouldn't be.


Well, just to make the point, small is in the eye of the beholder but if the site you are taking the picture from doesn't mind you doing it then it really isn't bandwidth theft, as you can't steal what is being given to you.

It really isn't my problem as I don't run a web site I simply think that, in general, it's accepted that little sites might use the bandwidth of bigger sites when they're starting out...sort of an ecosystem of sorts. Jason did it when he started PPCThoughts, now a few little sites are taking from him, and someday new sites will borrow from them. As long as you stop when asked I don't see it as that big of a crime.

[Pony99CA]

actually, the correct term IS 'bandwidth theft'. i didn't make it up. check google and yahoo, and you'll see.

While Google and Yahoo are great search sites, they aren't legal refernces. I associate "theft" with an illegal act, and unless it's really against the law, I think "theft" is an overblown term.

I can certainly make the argument that image linking is theft of services, in the same vein as people leaving their WiFi networks open for anybody to use is theft of service from their ISP. However, if someone isn't aware of the technical aspects, and doesn't know what's going on, calling them "thieves" isn't really fair. If they're aware of the problem, that may be another issue.

If you take this to its (il)logical conclusion, you'd be arguing that the whole Web is bandwidth theft. I have a link to Pocket PC Thoughts on my Web site, and when someone clicks it, they're using Jason's bandwidth. Yes, in that case, it's more obvious that the person is going to another site, but Jason didn't approve my link to his site, so should I have to copy all of his pages to my site? :-)

Image linking is really a specific form of "deep linking" (linking to something other than a site's home page), which some sites are against (for one reason, because they lose banner ad revenue). However, if you support deep linking in general, where do you draw the line between a "good" link and a "bad" link? Please be specific so we'll know all the "acceptable" links. :-D

Steve

[Tari Akpodiete]

this conversation is getting very tiresome, especially when people don't do their homework and then continue to make inaccurate statements.

the issue of linking to images on other people's servers has long been a problem. the term for this is, indeed, "bandwidth theft". and as i said, i didn't make it up.

whether you know it is not the right thing to do, doesn't mean anything other than you don't know that it is something you shouldn't be doing.

now, you can look it up or not, your choice, but if you don't, and continue to spout your opinion without being informed, oh well, then, no big surprise.

was i talking morality? no. i was simply using a term in common usage. big difference.

anyway, here is a google link for those willing to get more educated on the subject

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22bandwidth+theft%22

[ThomasC22]

this conversation is getting very tiresome, especially when people don't do their homework and then continue to make inaccurate statements.

the issue of linking to images on other people's servers has long been a problem. the term for this is, indeed, "bandwidth theft". and as i said, i didn't make it up.


I think this still applies:

While Google and Yahoo are great search sites, they aren't legal refernces. I associate "theft" with an illegal act, and unless it's really against the law, I think "theft" is an overblown term.


Plus, I've never seen this term in any dictionary (and I checked). Just because people take to using a term doesn't make it accurate especially when it depicts an act as illegal (e.g. theft)

[Pony99CA]

this conversation is getting very tiresome, especially when people don't do their homework and then continue to make inaccurate statements.

Awww, gee, teach, the dog ate my homework. :lol:

First, what "inaccurate statements" did I make? I wasn't disputing that the term might be widely used, nor that the term made some sense. I was just voicing my opinion that "theft" is a loaded term that implies people are doing something legally or morally wrong. Is it even possible for my opinion to be inaccurate?

Second, whether the term is common or not doesn't make its usage reasonable. Men in business used to refer to women as "girls" until enough women complained that that term wasn't appropriate. White men used to refer to black men as "boy" until enough people complained about that usage. Present day rap music is rife with commonly used terms that are degrading to women. Should those be ignored because they're in common use? I don't think so (and I hate Political Correctness).


the issue of linking to images on other people's servers has long been a problem. the term for this is, indeed, "bandwidth theft". and as i said, i didn't make it up.

I don't believe anyone said image linking wasn't a problem, nor do I believe anybody claimed that you made "bandwidth theft" up. All I said was that the phrase was an overblown term. What's wrong with calling it "image linking"? It's actually a more precise term than "bandwidth theft".


whether you know it is not the right thing to do, doesn't mean anything other than you don't know that it is something you shouldn't be doing.

In the real world, there's a huge difference between ignorance and apathy. Intent is important.


now, you can look it up or not, your choice, but if you don't, and continue to spout your opinion without being informed, oh well, then, no big surprise.

I didn't need to look it up (but I did anyway, just to placate you). I trusted you when you said it was in common use. However, my opinion about it hasn't changed for the reasons cited above.


was i talking morality? no. i was simply using a term in common usage. big difference.

Just like there's a big difference between intent to steal someone's bandwidth and unknowing usage of someone's bandwidth?

And, yes, you were talking about morality. Your whole point is that image linking is "wrong" (in other words, immoral). Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, words have connotations. See my reference to "girl" and "boy" above. "Theft" has connotations of morality and legality whether you choose to ignore them or not.

Now, how about answering the substantive questions in my post? What is your stance on deep linking, and, if you don't have problems with deep linking, where do you draw the line between an acceptable link and "bandwidth theft" (to avoid further debate about the term).

Steve

[Pony99CA]

this conversation is getting very tiresome, especially when people don't do their homework and then continue to make inaccurate statements.

the issue of linking to images on other people's servers has long been a problem. the term for this is, indeed, "bandwidth theft". and as i said, i didn't make it up.


I think this still applies:

While Google and Yahoo are great search sites, they aren't legal refernces. I associate "theft" with an illegal act, and unless it's really against the law, I think "theft" is an overblown term.


Plus, I've never seen this term in any dictionary (and I checked). Just because people take to using a term doesn't make it accurate especially when it depicts an act as illegal (e.g. theft)
Exactly, Thomas. As my previous post mentioned, words have connotations, and common usage doesn't make them "right".

That said, if the simple phrase "image linking" isn't enough, maybe we need another catchy term. "Bandwidth hijacking" and "bandwidth piracy" are both loaded, too. "Bandwidth usurpation" and "bandwidth expropriation" don't exactly trip off the tongue. :-)

After a romp through the thesaurus, I came up with "bandwidth squatting". What do you think?

Steve