Deactivate browser's print function

[Hans-Peter Diettrich]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

Andy Dingley wrote:

No-one spends money on buying web quality images ( read this <http://
adverlab.blogsp ot.com/2007/07/can-you-use-flickr-pics-in-ads.html),
so making them freely available isn't losing you any business.

This is not true. Almost nobody is *willing* to spend money for
pictures, but unallowed use is illegal and can become quite expensive.
Searching for (unallowed) uses can be more profitable than licensing
pictures in the usual way.

Don't let them on the web in general. Unless you've paid, you don't
even get to see them at this quality.
>
You're still exposed to theft here, but only by your identified
customers. That's a _lot_ simpler problem then an open shop window
with the goodies on display.

ACK.

Not to forget professionals, like Getty Images, which are experienced
and successful in collecting compensation for illegal use of their
pictures, worldwide! As mentioned above, prosecution of unallowed use of
pictures can pay back more than it costs - at least when left to
according professionals.

DoDi

[Dr J R Stockton]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

In comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html message <Xns997CE3397F2 9Fnanopand
aneredbojias@19 8.186.190.165>, Mon, 30 Jul 2007 05:20:14, Neredbojias
<monstersquashe r@yahoo.compost ed:

>Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 29 Jul 2007 21:14:48
>GMT Dr J R Stockton scribed:
>

>I've recently noted on a site closely associated with current US space
>work some code in which months...second s are obtained by UTC methods,
>but year is obtained by getYear. Granted, that does not matter *at
>present*; but one can expect it to do so at the turn of the year.

>
>Well, what is the source of the variablized date that getYear is appled to?
>You sure it's not "worked" on the UTC date?

It is the current date and time; new Date() .

As we use GMT in winter here, I shall never see any effect from that
error. But, just before they enter 2008, those in the USA will see
results appropriate for early 2007 Jan 1; and, shortly after they have
entered 2008, Koreans will see results for late 2008 Dec 31. Unless
they fix it.

That code should certainly be hidden, preferably also from browsers.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v6.05 IE 6
news:comp.lang. javascript FAQ <URL:http://www.jibbering.c om/faq/index.html>.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/js-index.htmjscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[Andy Dingley]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:43:43 -0400, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown @fastmail.fmwro te:

>"'Name him not!' said Gandalf,

Yes, but _which_ particular Voldemort are we not naming?
Luigi? Richard The Stupid? Andkon?

[andrew]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

On 2007-07-30, Andy Dingley <dingbat@codesm iths.comwrote:

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:43:43 -0400, Stan Brown
><the_stan_brow n@fastmail.fmwr ote:
>

>>"'Name him not!' said Gandalf,

>
Yes, but _which_ particular Voldemort are we not naming?
Luigi? Richard The Stupid? Andkon?

When you say 'Voldemort' of course you _actually_ are referring to
the Balrog that dragged Gandalf from Durin's Bridge?

Andrew

--
Andrew's Corner

http://people.aapt.net.au/~adjlstrong/homer.html

[Stan Brown]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:07:59 +0100 from Andy Dingley
<dingbat@codesm iths.com>:

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:43:43 -0400, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown @fastmail.fmwro te:
>

"'Name him not!' said Gandalf,

>
Yes, but _which_ particular Voldemort are we not naming?
Luigi? Richard The Stupid? Andkon?

The one whose name appeared right before my Tolkien quote.


--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA

http://OakRoadSystems.com/

HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:

http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/05/05/why_we_wont_help_you

[Neredbojias]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:32:46
GMT Dr J R Stockton scribed:

>>I've recently noted on a site closely associated with current US
>>space work some code in which months...second s are obtained by UTC
>>methods, but year is obtained by getYear. Granted, that does not
>>matter *at present*; but one can expect it to do so at the turn of
>>the year.

>>
>>Well, what is the source of the variablized date that getYear is
>>appled to? You sure it's not "worked" on the UTC date?

>
It is the current date and time; new Date() .

Yup. That's a mismatch.

As we use GMT in winter here, I shall never see any effect from that
error. But, just before they enter 2008, those in the USA will see
results appropriate for early 2007 Jan 1; and, shortly after they have
entered 2008, Koreans will see results for late 2008 Dec 31. Unless
they fix it.
>
That code should certainly be hidden, preferably also from browsers.

Kind of hard to perfectly conceal the code from everyone.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

[rf]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function


"Neredbojia s" <monstersquashe r@yahoo.comwrot e in message
news:Xns997DBF5 8650B8nanopanda neredbojias@198 .186.190.161...

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:32:46
GMT Dr J R Stockton scribed:

>That code should certainly be hidden, preferably also from browsers.

>
Kind of hard to perfectly conceal the code from everyone.

You would start by deactivating the browsers print function.

--
Richard.

[Dr J R Stockton]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

In comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html message <Xns997DBF58650 B8nanopand
aneredbojias@19 8.186.190.161>, Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:48:34, Neredbojias
<monstersquashe r@yahoo.compost ed:

>Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:32:46
>GMT Dr J R Stockton scribed:
>

>>>I've recently noted on a site closely associated with current US
>>>space work some code in which months...second s are obtained by UTC
>>>methods, but year is obtained by getYear. Granted, that does not
>>>matter *at present*; but one can expect it to do so at the turn of
>>>the year.
>>>
>>>Well, what is the source of the variablized date that getYear is
>>>appled to? You sure it's not "worked" on the UTC date?

>>
>It is the current date and time; new Date() .

>
>Yup. That's a mismatch.

You cannot tell from that response. They read the local Y and the UTC
MDhms, and apply those more or less directly to get another Date, or so
it seems to me.

>As we use GMT in winter here, I shall never see any effect from that
>error. But, just before they enter 2008, those in the USA will see
>results appropriate for early 2007 Jan 1; and, shortly after they have
>entered 2008, Koreans will see results for late 2008 Dec 31. Unless
>they fix it.
>>
>That code should certainly be hidden, preferably also from browsers.

>
>Kind of hard to perfectly conceal the code from everyone.

In this case, assuming a Windows-like GUI, select-delete will be best.
Much better code is now on my site, and, if they answer my Web-form,
I'll tell them where.


It's a good idea to read the newsgroup c.l.j and its FAQ. See below.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v6.05 IE 6
news:comp.lang. javascript FAQ <URL:http://www.jibbering.c om/faq/index.html>.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/js-index.htmjscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[Neredbojias]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:24:13 GMT
Dr J R Stockton scribed:

>>>>Well, what is the source of the variablized date that getYear is
>>>>appled to? You sure it's not "worked" on the UTC date?
>>>
>>It is the current date and time; new Date() .

>>
>>Yup. That's a mismatch.

>
You cannot tell from that response. They read the local Y and the UTC
MDhms, and apply those more or less directly to get another Date, or so
it seems to me.

That's wierd. Almost governmental, one might say. :)

>>As we use GMT in winter here, I shall never see any effect from that
>>error. But, just before they enter 2008, those in the USA will see
>>results appropriate for early 2007 Jan 1; and, shortly after they have
>>entered 2008, Koreans will see results for late 2008 Dec 31. Unless
>>they fix it.
>>>
>>That code should certainly be hidden, preferably also from browsers.

>>
>>Kind of hard to perfectly conceal the code from everyone.

>
In this case, assuming a Windows-like GUI, select-delete will be best.
Much better code is now on my site, and, if they answer my Web-form,
I'll tell them where.
>
>
It's a good idea to read the newsgroup c.l.j and its FAQ. See below.

A few years ago I used to drift by there occasionally, but they yelled at
me. And...some of the people are really pedantic. And...can I help it if
I was born obnoxious?

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

[Mark Shroyer]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

On 2007-07-28, Cartoper <cartoper@gmail .comwrote:

On Jul 28, 10:45 am, Sherm Pendley <spamt...@dot-app.orgwrote:
>
First off, I don't disagree that all these types of things are easy to
get around, IF YOU KNOW HOW. Being a professional software developer
I understand that it isn't a matter of if your code is stolen, but
when is it stolen.
>
On the other hand I think it is foolish not to put basic measures in
place to "keep the honest people honest". I am putting together my
photography studio web site and I want to at least let folks know that
I don't want them taking my images. In the end I will leave it to
their congest (how do you spell this work? I spend 10 minutes trying
to figure it out and I cannot, please enlighten this poor fool that
cannot smell!) as to go around my basic measures or not;)

I'm only correcting you because you explicitly asked for it (in
other words, not just to be a jerk):

congest -conscience (?)
spend -spent
smell -spell (I think; can you smell?)

I wouldn't encourage trying to use client-side obfuscation to
prevent people from obtaining your images and HTML source code. The
people who want to get your images will get them one way or another,
and trying to put (highly ineffective) road blocks in their way will
only anger them, and may even cause them to increase their efforts
out of spite. It will also drive away potential visitors -- plenty
of people still browse without JavaScript, and I'm personally not
likely to turn off NoScript for any particular site unless I know
beforehand that it's going to be worthwhile.

As for this "HTML Guard" thing, it's absolutely worthless. After
disabling NoScript I was still able to right-click on and save the
image on the sample site, simply because I have the "Allow scripts
to disable or replace context menus" Firefox option disabled. And
as another author already mentioned, the Web Developer plugin is
happy to show you the JavaScript-generated HTML.

This stuff is snake oil, pure and simple. Don't break your web site
in a misguided implementation of absolutely ineffectual copy
protection.

Mark

--
Mark Shroyer

http://markshroyer.com/

[Dr J R Stockton]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

In comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html message <Xns997ED5CC623 D1nanopand
aneredbojias@19 8.186.190.161>, Wed, 1 Aug 2007 04:01:00, Neredbojias
<monstersquashe r@yahoo.compost ed:

>Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 31 Jul 2007 20:24:13 GMT
>Dr J R Stockton scribed:
>

>>>>>Well, what is the source of the variablized date that getYear is
>>>>>appled to? You sure it's not "worked" on the UTC date?
>>>>
>>>It is the current date and time; new Date() .
>>>
>>>Yup. That's a mismatch.

>>
>You cannot tell from that response. They read the local Y and the UTC
>MDhms, and apply those more or less directly to get another Date, or so
>it seems to me.

>
>That's wierd. Almost governmental, one might say. :)

Rem acu tetigisti - it's a .gov site.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v6.05 IE 6.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/- w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
PAS EXE etc : <URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/programs/- see 00index.htm
Dates - miscdate.htm moredate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

[Neredbojias]

Re: Deactivate browser's print function

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 01 Aug 2007 18:18:55
GMT Dr J R Stockton scribed:

>>>>Yup. That's a mismatch.
>>>
>>You cannot tell from that response. They read the local Y and the
>>UTC MDhms, and apply those more or less directly to get another
>>Date, or so it seems to me.

>>
>>That's wierd. Almost governmental, one might say. :)

>
Rem acu tetigisti - it's a .gov site.

Klaatu Barrada Nicto - yep, I figured.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.