rsaum8 Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 Happy New Year everyone! I have a continual problem with people, unwittingly mainly, finding images from my site they like, usually through Google - then using the image on their own site, without transferring the resource to their own server. When I can track these down I send them a polite email. However, in my awstats, in the section external links to my site - there's one which comes up the whole time. It's a Turkish forum (akvaryum) which accounts for 50% of links - what the stats mean I think is that they're using some resource from my server, I'm pretty sure. I've got no idea how to trace it! It's in a foreign language and there are 1000's of posts. Any suggestions as to how I can track this down? I've got a higher bandwidth use than I'd expect I think, this is one reason at least for me to do this. Any suggestions welcome. Perhaps you know of a stats package for instance, which might show me the info I need? Many thanks Richard Quote
TCH-Bruce Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 You can ban the IP from your site which would prevent them from stealing. Or you can use the hotlinking feature to protect your content. Quote
TCH-Andy Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 As Bruce says, you can use hotlink protection - and just make it so that they can't just link to your site, and would need to transfer the image. You can either set this up in cpanel, or you can edit your .htaccessfile ( see hotlink protection article Quote
wampthing Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 I had a pretty popular news site hotlinking a photo from one of my sites. I simply changed the photo (ie added another photo and renamed it to what they were hotlinking). It was a very funny photo that was rather inappropriate for their site. It was down within a few hours. While that doesnt really solve any problems, it made me feel better. Quote
abinidi Posted January 4, 2007 Posted January 4, 2007 In my case, I decided I wasn't interested in Google Images indexing my site for images, so I added a robots.txt file that bans the Google Image search engine. The Google Image bot is a separate bot from the regular Google bot, so you can prevent Google Images from indexing your content, while still allowing Google (normal text) to index your content. This won't solve your current problem, but might help you keep your images private in the future. Of course, this supposes that the bots will obey the robots.txt file (which Google does), so you will keep regular searchers away. It doesn't help with rogue bots, however. Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 4, 2007 Author Posted January 4, 2007 Great, 4 replies! Thanks for your spontaneous help - hotlinking was the term missing from my vocabulary, obviously. Duly added, problem solved. Thanks again Richard Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Posted January 6, 2007 Thanks Bruce Actually, this is really strange but the hotlink protection is working on some sites but not others. There are 2 Blogspotters, both hotlinking (one completely eroneously spreading misinformation, mistaking my image for something it's not!) - the protection is working against one (who had a polite email) but not the other, who I just found. Straightforward embedded image with the usual tags. Think I'll open a ticket, maybe TCH can advise... Richard Quote
carbonize Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Just remember that antihotlinking may appear not to work if you have the image in your cache already. Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Posted January 6, 2007 Just remember that antihotlinking may appear not to work if you have the image in your cache already. I'm wondering whether it might be cached from somewhere else. Google caches pages doesn't it? Personally, I never saw the page to cache it. Richard Quote
pagoda Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Happy New Year everyone! I have a continual problem with people, unwittingly mainly, finding images from my site they like, usually through Google - then using the image on their own site, without transferring the resource to their own server. Greetings, Please pardon me if this is a rather contorted way of looking at this problem, but... I own a graphic and web design business. When I first put my site up in 2003 I noticed this same problem. I eventually switched my site from page based to CMS since the amount of content of I was serving started to get out of hand. What does this have to do with people horking your images? As it turns out, those links in were a major boon to my site's SEO. So, I ultimately redesigned the site structure, decided to not mess with the folks who were in effect stealing my copyrighted materials and write it off as an SEO expense. Is this a weird way to look at this? Perhaps. But it has really helped search engine ratings. As a result of these early incidents, I try to sprinkle new images in fixed directories once in a while so people (usually kids and teens wallpapering their blogs) set up these incoming links and ultimately help my SEO efforts. Just something to think about if SEO is on your radar. Of course when this does get out of hand threatening your resources (and your invoice from TCH) then you have to act. But if your site is trying to deliver goods, services or information to the public, then this might be a welcomed benefit. Happy New Year! Quote
carbonize Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 I can't see how people using your images on their site would help your SEO as they are not actually linking to your site they aer just showing images from your site. Quote
pagoda Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 (edited) I can't see how people using your images on their site would help your SEO as they are not actually linking to your site they aer just showing images from your site. Greetings, A link in does help. As an example, do a Google search, something like: link:www.mysite.com Google is one such search engine where links into a site do affect ratings, so, it's a "Good Thing". Cheers, pagoda Whoops- didn't catch the total gist of your post. Yes, I see what you are pointing out. Yet the fact remains that, for example, on a blog setup where an image is linked to from your site it will be logged as a link as in the search example above. I see this all the time when I search links into my site using various link searches (not just Google). But, as I said, if this is causing you more headaches than it's solving, then it's worth blocking. When I do care about either blocking excessive bandwidth problems, or content I care to retain ownership and control over I use the tools mentioned in the previous posts and/or use watermarks (either obvious ones or steganographic watermarks with a tracking service), but this might be overkill depending on what your site aims to do. Have a great day! Edited January 6, 2007 by pagoda Quote
carbonize Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Yes but what I am saying is that someone using an image from your site on theirs just using the<img tag is not a link back to your site. Quote
pagoda Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Yes but what I am saying is that someone using an image from your site on theirs just using the<img tag is not a link back to your site. That statement is true as far as I know. It is also true that when someone papers a blog with one of my images I see this trail as a link into my site. Now, that said, I am not certain how the blogs where this has been the case work exactly, and frankly I haven't really cared since it is has helped. My guess though, is that somewhere embedded in the script generated page(s) there is an explicit reference to my website other than in an <img> tag. This discussion has actually got me curious just how this is working in an advantageous manner in some cases. I think I'll look over the logs and see what I can discover... Hmm. This isn't obvious to me why some uses of my images appear in a link search and some do not. I was hoping to have something to say in short order but I'm going to have to look further... Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Posted January 6, 2007 err... sorry boys, could I interrupt and ask if either of you can see the anti-hotlinked image on the following page? http://darwinsbeagle2007.blogspot.com/2006...an-life-34.html It's embedded left of the second paragraph in, starting "The Ediacaran fossils are the oldest definite multicellular fossils.." - a green image on a white background. Can you tell me how many images on that page there are? I count 6 including mine. Carl from TCH says he can't see it. Thanks Richard Quote
carbonize Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 (edited) If you mean http://www.rsaum.co.uk/weblog/images/work/cell01-thumb.jpg I see it just fine. Sounds like your anti hotlinking is incorrect. I do notice it is also a link back to the image. Edited January 6, 2007 by carbonize Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 6, 2007 Author Posted January 6, 2007 Thanks Carbonize, that means the TCH guy wasn't seeing it - and yep, the anti hotlinking isn't working, at least not properly. Hmm. Quote
carbonize Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 I would show you my anti hotlinking code but my wonderful employer has blocked my domain on the works proxy. I'm sure Carl, Andy or one of the other intelligent TCH techs will be able to sort it out for you. Quote
rsaum8 Posted January 9, 2007 Author Posted January 9, 2007 All resolved. An .htaccess conflict... thanks to TCH! value for money or what? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.