 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Desktop Feature Requests |
Page:
1 2  Previous Next
|
|
Ability to override online image |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,005 |
| | Posted: | | | | For those of you, who have a webspace without PHP or MySQL support, but would like to have your customized collection on it, try the HTML Export in my CCViewer. Import Profiler XML into the Viewer and then exort your collection to HTML. The result can look something like this. | | | 
 | | | | Last edited: by TomGaines |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 2,692 |
| | Posted: | | | | The problem with this is that the images are showing as part of invelos - but have not been reviewed by invelos.
So who is held liable if the images are hard core porn?
Who would be held liable if these are full size images with spines - so anyone could use these to produce new covers?
In both these case, it would appear that Invleos was at least condoning them.
The advantage of phpdvdprofiler (and others of the same ilk) - is that these sites are clearly not owned by Invelos. | | | | Paul |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Good point, pauls. I would have to agree with this, which means keep it outside of profiler, like php.
Also who would be responsible for the user posting custom cover art, or worse Custom Cover Art for titles which have not been announced or in some cases not even in theatres yet. Nope this wouldn't work,.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wouldn't it be possible to prevent liability by having the user explicitly declare that he or she will assume full responsibility / liability while uploading the link to the scans in question and - additionally - by having a popup appear upon display of an online collection containing external scans in which Invelos states it is not responsible for any external images appearing on that webpage? (I reckon it would be possible to mark these visually in one way or another, as to indicate which ones are externally hosted.) At present, DVDP contains links to IMDb. That fact in itself does not imply liability for the abundance of errors in IMDb, or... ?  | | | | Last edited: by dee1959jay |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | deejay:
I am not certain that such a declaration would be sufficient to clear Invelos and other users. As for IMDb, there is a BIG difference between linking to their site and scraping their data. Nobody in their right mind would prevent someone from linking to their site, particular if they are a business. I am afraid the more i think about this one, the more risky it becomes.
Let me give an example of possible fallout. A user puts up custom cover art, as it stands now that art could copied and pasted by any other user, and there are ways around all the current methods used to block such copying and pasting. This also, as far as I know does not leave a trail, the copying and pasting is all done anonymously. The only possible recourse that a Studio would have for this scenario would be to pursue the user posting the Custom Cover Art and probabaly try and shut Invelos' website down...all because a user would not behave himself. Nope, bad idea.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | The user in question might indeed provoke prosecution, but I'm not so sure this would apply to Invelos as well, as the Invelos website and the Invelos servers would not contain the illegal cover art, but an URL. What would be the essential difference with, let's say, the results of a Google search? (I'm trying to think in terms of SOLUTIONS here rather than just PROBLEMS - that's what lawyers do, and I'd hate to associate myself with their way of thinking...  .) |
| | Registered: March 19, 2007 |  Posts: 582 |
| | Posted: | | | | Then again, Google have had some issues from copyright holders already. But they have resources to stall/fight/pay fines etc.
Remember that Pirate Bay do not host anything, but they are still being hold responsible. Even if the picture shown at your collection at Invelos is hosted elsewhere, it would not clear Invelos of all responsibility.
I don't anyone would care, but better safe than sorry. I see no reason to play with fire, even if the chance of something burning down is almost non-existent. | | |  |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 |  Posts: 1,982 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pauls42: Quote:
So who is held liable if the images are hard core porn?
(...)
In both these case, it would appear that Invleos was at least condoning them. Invelos had never banned hardcore image if the image is what is on the cover of the dvd. The cover of "Alex de Renzy's Wild Thing" that I've entered in the database a couple of year ago is certainly in this category. You have no idea of how I hate this "think of the children" mentality... |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pauls42: Quote:
The problem with this is that the images are showing as part of invelos - but have not been reviewed by invelos. Um, isn't invelos already showing pictures that have not been reviewed by them? I mean, you have 10 in your signature. Beastus has 17. Aren't those images fed by your site? Quote:
So who is held liable if the images are hard core porn? This is a non-issue as hardcore porn covers are already available in the current online collection. Quote:
Who would be held liable if these are full size images with spines - so anyone could use these to produce new covers?
In both these case, it would appear that Invleos was at least condoning them.
The advantage of phpdvdprofiler (and others of the same ilk) - is that these sites are clearly not owned by Invelos. Whether or not it would appear that invelos was condoning them isn't an issue either, at least not for us as users. That is something that Ken will have to decide. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 252 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting AESP_pres: Quote:
Invelos had never banned hardcore image if the image is what is on the cover of the dvd. The cover of "Alex de Renzy's Wild Thing" that I've entered in the database a couple of year ago is certainly in this category. You have no idea of how I hate this "think of the children" mentality... Profiler has AFAIK always accepted adult titles of all sorts, but at times has restricted what is displayed on the public user lists hosted by them. Way back in the IVS days, restricting adult images was the policy IIRC in particular due to some court rulings at the time connected with such "think of the children" type hysterics you mention - and Ken, Jesse & the other IVS crew had decided not to make themselves a possible test case target. I forget exactly when the various practices changed over the years, but for some time images (or entire profiles?) labeled as 'adult' wouldn't display online at all. Later they would display after clicking through a warning message that only popped up if the profile list contained adult items. Currently things are much more relaxed and user controlled. Hopefully I'm recalling this ancient history correctly...!  | | | | Last edited: by Cyclograph |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,339 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have very few uses for this feature, but I totally understand why people want it... i'll throw my "solution" into the hat...
what about... as part of the Profiler Plus subscription, or as an Add On Subscription to profiler plus... users can submit alternate cover art for their online collection in a similar way that they contribute now... via an adapted in program upload function.
this alternate cover art would then have to follow a new set of rules such as... 200kb max, size requirements, lack of spine, lack of pirated titles etc etc... whatever invelos is comfortable with in the main database
once the user submits their alternate cover art... it goes through an approval process, no voters and non public - just an invelos employee rubber stamping that it is appropriate and meets all the rules set above. the image then goes into the users online profile. approval time can be about as long as profile submission or even slightly longer... i'd say any time less then a week would be alright depending on the price... the cheaper the service the longer wait is acceptable. Invelos could choose to make it unlimited, or charge per X amount of images... or to curb costs... they could also put in the rules that the cover has to be a true alternate or manual profile... this way for example Skip can not upload his 12GB of hi-res art just because he wants higher quality... only people who have legit re-releases and home movies get to use the service.
I believe the plan i have just laid out addresses all copyright, explicit, and file size concerns that have been pointed out above. | | | | -JoN | | | | Last edited: by ruineddaydreams |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | I can definitely see a use for this, if nothing else for the alternate cover issue. |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 1,982 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ruineddaydreams: Quote:
I believe the plan i have just laid out addresses all copyright, explicit, and file size concerns that have been pointed out above. That's why I will continue with the way I already have my collection online, I can place whatever I want on my webhost and for me it's important. I have many title that were never released uncut or just released on dvd that are digital version of vhs or PDV (not sure of the term, but this is movie that I've paid to download), so I've a lot of custom cover (theatrical poster, VHS cover or done by me using a screen capture with the title inserted). So I'm probably one of the few who aren't not really interested by the future online version. And nobody force me to use an invented adult rating  | | | | Last edited: by Jimmy S |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting AESP_pres: Quote:
Quoting ruineddaydreams:
Quote:
I believe the plan i have just laid out addresses all copyright, explicit, and file size concerns that have been pointed out above.
That's why I will continue with the way I already have my collection online, I can place whatever I want on my webhost and for me it's important. I have many title that were never released uncut or just released on dvd that are digital version of vhs or PDV (not sure of the term, but this is movie that I've paid to download), so I've a lot of custom cover (theatrical poster, VHS cover or done by me using a screen capture with the title inserted). So I'm probably one of the few who aren't not really interested by the future online version.
And nobody force me to use an invented adult rating Agreed, AESP. Though a new look might be nice, this one is OLD.  I would have no problem if ken chose to make alternative covers available to better deal with re-releases. , with Rules as outlined above. But as I understood the users request he basically wanted to be able upload to HIS Online whatever he wanted in terms of Covers so that others could see exactly what he had, this is where we would start treading into dangerous ground. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: May 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,033 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well this was posted as a very simple change to quickly (next update) offer a way for alternative and manual profiles to have an image. The reason for posting it is to gauge interest and bring up any possible problems/solutions/alternate ideas for Ken to then consider (so thanks to those that provided alternatives to go along with their reservations for this idea)
I fully understand the potential problems with other images being displayed (though I think its more a problem with the legal system and people wanting to blame everyone but themselves, but that's a completely different discussion that doesn't belong here)
For me, my online only consists of store bought dvds that are available in the online (no games, software, or manual profiles for home videos) so the solution of allowing multiple images per dvd and letting the user choose which one to use/download to their local would be a satisfactory solution, and actually better in my opinion because it allows people without scanners to have the cover scan that matches their release (or the 1 of however many slip covers made available during initial release). Obviously if this was available they would have to follow the current rules for images (size and being actual covers not custom art work).
I like my images to match the cover art I have, so when I have rerelease, or a profile missing a slip cover I scan my own (but not everyone can do that) it would be nice if the online also reflected these variances but since I mainly use my online list to let people know what movies I have/want (for gift purposes) as long as they know which movie it's not a big deal.
-Agrare |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,494 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote:
The problem would be that the images would be shown in the context of the Invelos website. Since Invelos can't control neither content nor size* of the image, it could get them into trouble.
Otherwise Invelos would need to put a disclaimer in front of the collection just like they do when you vote on a cover scan.
*Even if they use the HTML attributes height and width for a picture the image is still there in it's full size and quality. I agree with Karsten as some of our posts with their own uploads far exceed a typical 794 x 533 picture (or 800 x 600 typical) .. | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry | | | | Last edited: by widescreenforever |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Desktop Feature Requests |
Page:
1 2 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |