On 1:29:33 pm 01/22/06 Scarletdown <Scarletdown_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 07:35 -0600, Darth Android wrote:
> > What would keep someone from purchasing a print and then sending
> > it to all their friends that want one or posting it on the
> > internet?
>
> Nothing could prevent that. Artists who distribute their works
> electronically simply have to accept the inevitability that some
> people are going to end up with unpaid copies no matter what. There
> is really nothing that you can due to prevent copying and sharing,
> other than realize and understand that the ones who do end up with
> "free" copies are people who would not have purchased the work
> legitimately in the first place.
>
> As for me, I think $1.00 per piece would be reasonable, as a bare
> minimum, depending on the quality of the work, especially if they are
> taking payments via PayPal, then that would definitely be the minimum
> to make it worth the fees. For really really high quality stuff,
> $2.50 to $5.00 would not be unreasonable. Just remember, if it is
> good enough, they will pay (except for those who would never pay
> under any circumstances).
>
> --
> Scarletdown
>
In a digital image, it is not difficult to use
steganography to imbed a unique signature into a
picture file. Using the original file as a key,
one can then extract the signature, which would
say something like "this copy sold to r*** r******"
One can make a unique signitaure for each sale,
and now you have a easy way of tracing where a
distributed image where it came from.
--Dale
Received on Sun Jan 22 2006 - 16:51:23 CST