Google removed the image viewing feature

[WinterHold]

The internet is becoming more and more closed. Sad, honestly whoever is posting on the internet, is posting for the whole world to see. WWW= "World Wide" Web. These constraints on the freedoms, and this "obsession" with "the credit of work" will end and ruin the internet and the world as we know it.

If you worry about the copyrights of your images; then don't post them on a place holding the prefex "World Wide Web".

If I take a picture with a camera in the street, and the background shows "a painting displayed on public view"; then I don't mind that my painting "shows up in the pictures of others, taken in public view". Whoever wants to copyright their images, should hide them from public display. That's common sense.

Soon enough; this world will only be for the wealthy. Mark my words.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...-tool.html

---

What would Google do if I press "The PrintScreen Button" and use the images after cutting them?
Fart on the contract they signed?

---

Just wanted to add: if the west ends internet freedom; the west will fall.
Mark my words.

We know what's coming after. The censorship will not stop at the internet. It will enter the physical world. Isn't Trump promising a wall in the borders of Mexico?
Isn't Israel already have a wall of Berlin at the Gazza borders?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

So, you're mad at Google for making it difficult for people to steal things that don't belong to them?  Perhaps you missed the 'Images may be subject to copyright' bit.

Boru

[Gawdzilla Sama]

BFD. One more step. The sites want hits, this is one way to get them. I started on a non-graphic WWW during Desert Shield. Had to download pictures to see them.

[WinterHold]

So, you're mad at Google for making it difficult for people to steal things that don't belong to them?  Perhaps you missed the 'Images may be subject to copyright' bit.

Boru

"Steal"?
So, according to you, this is Ali Baba's cave, because all the members -or most; at least- use "stolen avatars".

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

So, you're mad at Google for making it difficult for people to steal things that don't belong to them?  Perhaps you missed the 'Images may be subject to copyright' bit.

Boru

"Steal"?
So, according to you, this is Ali Baba's cave, because all the members -or most; at least- use "stolen avatars".

Yup. You notice that I don't have an avatar. 

Boru

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If they don't want you to use a picture they can put a redirect in so you get something you weren't expecting.

[Minimalist]

Anyone who wants to protect their "copyright" should not be posting those things on the web in the first place.


Besides, use Alta Vista or something other than google.

[vorlon13]

Profoundly low resolution reproductions of copyrighted and/or other protected art seems like a silly thing to worry about.

10 X 15 pixel representation of the Mona Lisa is hardly going to detract from the value of the original. Particularly if the 10 X 15 pixel image isn't square on to the camera and is also out of focus since it's in the background.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The original is the image taken by the photographer in this case, their work, not the thing they're imaging.

[Aoi Magi]

Sites should be able to protect links and resources from being indexed by search engines quite easily, I don't see how Google has to go out of its way for this, but then again, Google is a private organization and can do whatever they want within their services. Also, I don't see this as censorship, rather corporates being stupid as usual.