A halt in production

13

Comments

  • DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    JC wrote: »
    Randy-

    If you are a smugmug user, all this external linking activity is available on your stats page for external referrers. If you are posting images on DGrin from another host, I imagine that information is available there as well. This was very easy for me to find because I have so few external referrers to list. When I posted the first blogspot link, I ignored the RSS feeds because I didn't think they were really a problem. Smugmug DOES make this information available for every account holder.

    SMUGMUG-
    How hard would it be to provide an option for each account to individually specify the valid potential referrers?

    I just looked at mine and see the blog site that's the problem, but I also see feedly.com. Is that a search website?
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,167 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    rwells wrote: »
    David, can you see my images when you follow the links?

    Doesn't matter. You are hot-linking to the thief's site.

    EDIT: Thief links have been removed by mutual agreement of Dgrin admins and moderators. We have mentioned before, and in several similar threads, not to hot-link to the thief's site here. We don't want to give Google or any other search bot the chance to automagically pick up those links in forum crawls to offer additional revenue and SEO advantages to thieves like him or anyone else associated with the scam.

    I have been eliminating all thief links throughout similar threads. If anyone else spots some, please report them to this thread so we can eliminate the links. Thank you.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    David_S85 wrote: »
    Doesn't matter. You are hot-linking to the thief's site.

    EDIT: Thief links have been removed by mutual agreement of Dgrin admins and moderators. We have mentioned before, and in several similar threads, not to hot-link to the thief's site here. We don't want to give Google or any other search bot the chance to automagically pick up those links in forum crawls to offer additional revenue and SEO advantages to thieves like him or anyone else associated with the scam.

    David,

    I have to appreciate your passion about image theft from Dgrin, and specifically here, my images that were stolen!

    I see by your post and actions, that SmugMug/Dgrin admins and moderators (SmugMug et al), has come to the agreement that said blog stole my and others images that were posted on SmugMug/Dgrin.


    More to come...
    Randy
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,167 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    rwells wrote: »
    David,

    I have to appreciate your passion about image theft from Dgrin, and specifically here, my images that were stolen!

    I see by your post and actions, that SmugMug/Dgrin admins and moderators (SmugMug et al), has come to the agreement that said blog stole my and others images that were posted on SmugMug/Dgrin.

    More to come...

    Randy, we are dealing with these issues, rest assured. There's been a lot of back room talk about what we can do, more now than last week or the week before, admittedly. All our recently posted images have been heisted from the forum lately. I don't like doing take down notices any more than anyone else. As mods and admins at dgrin, we are part time here and can't work on it full time. Most of the talk is late at night or very early in the a.m. and across many time zones so it isn't like we are all in the same room together at the same time to come up with an instant agreement. Wish we could be, really.

    We are on a tactic now that might, and I stress might work. And it may be temporary because we actually, truly, don't know how the thief is grabbing images. We can only guess and react, wait, and guess again. Even if every measure can be taken, thieves can still ultimately do brute force methods and load each page and literally pull images out of the cache and copy/paste them somewhere. Hopefully they won't. The internet is a strange animal.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,904 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    Dogdots wrote: »
    I just looked at mine and see the blog site that's the problem, but I also see feedly.com. Is that a search website?

    It's an aggregator application that you set up to be the interface to all of what you read online.
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    ian408 wrote: »
    It's an aggregator application that you set up to be the interface to all of what you read online.

    I didn't set anything up. I don't even know what it us. I did go there and can view dgrins form in its entirety if I search for it. I went there after seeing it in my stats.
  • leftquarkleftquark Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,784 Many Grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    Dogdots wrote: »
    I didn't set anything up. I don't even know what it us. I did go there and can view dgrins form in its entirety if I search for it. I went there after seeing it in my stats.

    Most likely one of your friends, family, or fans is using it. For example, some of my best friends use RSS feed aggregators like feedly to read their news, as well as see my new posts, all in 1 location, instead of having to go to each site every day. Flipboard, Zite, and Pulse are some of the bigger name ones that do similar things.
    dGrin Afficionado
    Former SmugMug Product Team
    aaron AT aaronmphotography DOT com
    Website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com
    My SmugMug CSS Customizations website: http://www.aaronmphotography.com/Customizations
  • DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    leftquark wrote: »
    Most likely one of your friends, family, or fans is using it. For example, some of my best friends use RSS feed aggregators like feedly to read their news, as well as see my new posts, all in 1 location, instead of having to go to each site every day. Flipboard, Zite, and Pulse are some of the bigger name ones that do similar things.

    Thank you for the explanation on what it is, what it does and why it would be in my stats.
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,893 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    leftquark wrote: »
    Currently if you turn External Embedding off the only site that can display your photos is SmugMug (referrer = SmugMug). We're going to add DGrin to that (referrer = SmugMug OR dgrin). If you turn External Embedding off you will still be able to post images to dgrin. When this blogspot site tries to display your image we will block it because the Referrer (BlogSpot) is not equal to SmugMug or DGrin. This should allow you all to continue posting to dgrin without fear that your images will be used maliciously.
    clap.gifclapclap.gifclap
    Awesome news, Aaron! While it doesn't guarantee that images cannot be stolen (screen grabs are always possible under current technology), it does give SmugMug customers an option that seriously raises the price for piracy, namely, pirates will have to store images themselves somewhere. I'm pretty sure most two-bit scam artists like ABC will just look for another site to clone.
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    Turn off external embedding - where and how?

    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • denisegoldbergdenisegoldberg Administrators Posts: 14,220 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    Turn off external embedding - where and how?
    That is a gallery setting in SmugMug.

    Go into gallery settings, click Security & Privacy tab, set external embedding as desired.

    You should be able to change all of the galleries within a folder at once.
    http://help.smugmug.com/customer/portal/articles/1240194-how-do-i-change-settings-for-multiple-galleries-at-once-

    --- Denise
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    That is a gallery setting in SmugMug.

    Go into gallery settings, click Security & Privacy tab, set external embedding as desired.

    You should be able to change all of the galleries within a folder at once.

    --- Denise


    Duh, I have seen that so many times. Does that turn off the ability to insert an image to Dgrin? If not, what is used for?


    Thanks

    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • black mambablack mamba Registered Users Posts: 8,319 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    Aaron....

    Before I comment further, I want you to fully understand something; I am, basically, a very happy Dgrinner. And I have been for over 7 years. While I've never interfaced directly with anyone at SmugMug, my perception is that all the folks there are surely as you represent....dedicated, passionate, working hard to make it all happen. And I suppose that sometimes it's a stressful, thankless effort on their part. And on yours as well.

    Make no mistake. I absolutely believe you when you state that you, only in the last several days, have become aware of this current situation we are all concerned about. Your veracity is not in question. I'm very happy to see you give this issue the attention it commands. In fact, concerning the " technical " side of things, I'm impressed that y'all have acted so quickly to combat these intrusions upon our group.

    Since joining SmugMug, I've been under the impression that your bunch also controls the operation of Dgrin. What I don't know is how closely the two factions interrelate on a daily working basis. I don't know if the two groups routinely exchange information, plans, etc. or if y'all have elected to function fairly autonomously from each other. Based on your reactions in this case, I've about decided that perhaps I've been directing my frustrations and comments toward the wrong party. Perhaps it's the Dgrin bunch I have a beef with. It sounds as if Smugmug was caught off guard as much as some of us think we were.

    When the smoke clears, my complaint hasn't changed one little bit. That long-running post at the end of last year very clearly evidences that serious intrusions upon our forum were known to be occurring. The responsible party, or parties, that knew of the scope and severity of these intrusions were apparently lax in bringing this information to Smugmug's attention. During the duration of the referenced posting, at least 3 Dgrin moderators had input. I can't understand why an issue that commanded that much attention from a whole host of folks did not work its way up the chain of command.

    Regardless of who dropped the ball, the fact remains that illegal activities against forum members were occurring. And I, as well as a host of others, were never apprised of that fact. I only became aware of, in the last couple of days, that prior posting I've referenced. Had I been aware of its implications at the time, I would have ceased posting long ago.....waiting for a technical solution to the problem, if there is one.

    I appreciate that it would be virtually impossible to alert everyone to every little " intrusion " that may occur. And most of those kind of intrusions are innocuous anyway. But we're talking about a different animal entirely. These were instances wherein the members copyrighted materials were being actively lifted, on a wholesale basis, from Dgrin and displayed on other sites. That circumstance demands that we be informed on a timely basis.

    Many posters in our forum are very Internet savvy folks. They are well aware of the vagaries inherent in Internet activity and have adopted a threshold level of tolerance that lets them accept some realities that others cannot. I'm one of those who aren't quite so savvy. I don't have the tolerance that some do. I depend on those running the forum to alert me to major intrusions that can adversely affect me in a significant way. I can then decide exactly what I'm willing to tolerate.

    Listening to all those folks who have a much greater depth of Internet understanding, the reality seems to be that true " safety " in that arena does not exist. Since I'm one that can't abide with the downside to Internet realities and the likelihood of my stuff being plastered all over, I should have quit the game a long time ago. This is strictly a hobby to me....unfortunately, the appeal of an Internet presence is unraveling before my eyes.
    I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    I wonder if websites like http://www.1x.com are affected by this type of criminal activity. A thousand or so images are posted every week in their http://1x.com/weeklytheme.

    Is it different because the galleries have smaller sized images and you need to click on them to enlarge?

    I have learned so much by accessing Dgrin on a regular basis and plan on continuing to do so.

    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • Jack'll doJack'll do Registered Users Posts: 2,977 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    That is a gallery setting in SmugMug.

    Go into gallery settings, click Security & Privacy tab, set external embedding as desired.

    You should be able to change all of the galleries within a folder at once.
    http://help.smugmug.com/customer/portal/articles/1240194-how-do-i-change-settings-for-multiple-galleries-at-once-

    --- Denise

    When I tried to set "external embedding" for "all" galleries site wide I got this warning !!

    Gallery%20settings.jpg

    I don't like taking steps that "can never be undone". What's the story here?Is forever really FOREVER???

    Jack
    (My real name is John but Jack'll do)
  • PrevailingConditionsPrevailingConditions Registered Users Posts: 178 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2015
    I wonder if websites like http://www.1x.com are affected by this type of criminal activity. A thousand or so images are posted every week in their http://1x.com/weeklytheme.

    Is it different because the galleries have smaller sized images and you need to click on them to enlarge?

    I have learned so much by accessing Dgrin on a regular basis and plan on continuing to do so.

    Phil

    No, I'm sure they all suffer the same problem. It's really easy to do, that's why the pirates do it.
    Dogdots wrote: »
    Thank you Mike for answering my question. Would it be in the best interest of a photographer with a website to have RSS Feed's disabled?

    I'm afraid I can't answer that question for you. I don't see a problem with it, but I'm sure that others would see it quite differently. If you have friends, family, or customers using RSS to find your content then you are closing that path.

    From the earlier comment about shutting off RSS, that's pretty much my main way of browsing content on the web. I subscribe to a bunch of sites using Feedly. When I see something interesting there, I'll follow the links to the actual website. It makes it much faster and more efficient to browse the web. I don't have to visit a bunch of sites to find something interesting. I go to one.

    Mike
    flickr
    I welcome your feedback, but leave the editing to me - thanks!
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,167 moderator
    edited February 7, 2015
    I have a hidden gallery at my SM that is set up for posting shots on forums like this one, and with external embedding turned on. I often post images at about 5 other places regularly. Otherwise, external embedding is always turned off in every one of my other and more important SM galleries.

    What this hidden gallery for forum postings allows me to do is limit display sizes and the scope of use for images I am willing to post elsewhere. All are now watermarked in case they find their way to places I don't wish. And even then, I know that I am the main culprit if they do go astray. The internet is always a risky place to post stuff, but if you set your own constraints, then you own most of the responsibility and liability of abuse. I can't stop ultimate abuse of the images I post out there, but even then, that is sometimes the cost of being public on the internet.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2015
    No, I'm sure they all suffer the same problem. It's really easy to do, that's why the pirates do it.



    I'm afraid I can't answer that question for you. I don't see a problem with it, but I'm sure that others would see it quite differently. If you have friends, family, or customers using RSS to find your content then you are closing that path.

    From the earlier comment about shutting off RSS, that's pretty much my main way of browsing content on the web. I subscribe to a bunch of sites using Feedly. When I see something interesting there, I'll follow the links to the actual website. It makes it much faster and more efficient to browse the web. I don't have to visit a bunch of sites to find something interesting. I go to one.

    Mike

    I can see where RSS feeds can be a good thing and not a good thing. I didn't know how widely it was used by people.
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,904 moderator
    edited February 8, 2015
    Dogdots wrote: »
    I can see where RSS feeds can be a good thing and not a good thing. I didn't know how widely it was used by people.

    RSS is a great way to aggregate the stuff you're interested in. Which sucks because without it, there's not a lot real RSS users will receive.
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
  • AlexSharkAlexShark Registered Users Posts: 198 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2015
    David_S85 wrote: »
    Otherwise, external embedding is always turned off in every one of my other and more important SM galleries.

    David, here's something I'm trying to convey but not even echo answers:

    (See my next post.)

    Is this one of your embedding-disabled galleries? I just poked around your site at random. What you see here, however, is now on MY site. If I had the patience and the inclination to edit it in PS, crop, and save it as mine -- I'd be in the thieving business! But right now the saved png is sitting on my desktop, awaiting my diabolical plot to mature.

    I'll delete it of course, once you read this message.

    Best,
    Alex
    Photography is about what does not meet the eye
    Be my guest: Alex Braverman Photography
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,893 moderator
    edited February 8, 2015
    ^ Oddly, no image is showing in FF/Win, but that doesn't disprove your point, just means there's an error somewhere in your post.

    You are of course, correct. Anyone can copy anything that's on their computer screen, save it, rename it, post it wherever they like, sell it, whatever. It doesn't require any special expertise or software and without imposing a whole new regimen of DRM in hardware and software (which would be much worse), there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Doesn't matter whether the image comes from SmugMug, Dgrin, the MOMA, the US government, or Sony. I think most people here understand that, and those who are making a living from photography are careful to use watermarks and limit the size of the images they post. But for those who haven't gotten the message yet,

    OFFICIAL WARNING: When you make something available on the Internet, it becomes available on the Internet.

    mwink.gif

    It is nevertheless true that some forms of piracy are easier to automate than others, and forcing pirates to use their own storage for images slows their process and raises their costs. These sites are mostly two-bit scams that depend on volume to make any money at all, so I think it's worthwhile to look for ways to make their lives more difficult.
  • AlexSharkAlexShark Registered Users Posts: 198 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2015
    Oh, why not. Let's not be lazy:

    DavidWattsLiftedPhoto-X2.jpg

    1. Since the photo is a screenshot, the metadata is perfectly blank and editable. Including the author and the copyright.

    2. With judicious application of the content-aware patch tool I removed three last letters of both lines of your watermark. And placed my own -- as a reminder. Clearly, I could have put a watermark in my own name.

    The bottom line? There's no defense.
    Photography is about what does not meet the eye
    Be my guest: Alex Braverman Photography
  • DogdotsDogdots Registered Users Posts: 8,795 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2015
    David_S85 wrote: »
    I have a hidden gallery at my SM that is set up for posting shots on forums like this one, and with external embedding turned on. I often post images at about 5 other places regularly. Otherwise, external embedding is always turned off in every one of my other and more important SM galleries.

    What this hidden gallery for forum postings allows me to do is limit display sizes and the scope of use for images I am willing to post elsewhere. All are now watermarked in case they find their way to places I don't wish. And even then, I know that I am the main culprit if they do go astray. The internet is always a risky place to post stuff, but if you set your own constraints, then you own most of the responsibility and liability of abuse. I can't stop ultimate abuse of the images I post out there, but even then, that is sometimes the cost of being public on the internet.

    I too have a separate gallery (hidden) on my smug website just for posting photos on forums. As soon as I turned off all external linking my photos disappeared from postings on dgrin - I didn't check them all, but the ones I checked were gone. This is the only gallery I allowed external linking.
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,167 moderator
    edited February 8, 2015
    AlexShark wrote: »
    But right now the saved png is sitting on my desktop, awaiting my diabolical plot to mature.
    Best,
    Alex

    Bwahahahahaha! I am all ears! ear.gif I actually want to see that on the Jumbo-tron in Times Square, if you can swing it. Just get a picture of it when it's up there so I can put it on my site for the re-stealing.

    Brute force methods always work. I really doubt that someone with feeds access to Dgrin will go to the effort of scrubbing off watermarks (someone else might), but yes, you've proven that can be done. Something I've always known. And I'm OK with that. I just turned off external embedding in that gallery, BTW. Not that the image up there ^ will go away. And yet, I'm OK with that. :D
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • PrevailingConditionsPrevailingConditions Registered Users Posts: 178 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2015
    Richard wrote: »

    Anyone can copy anything that's on their computer screen, save it, rename it, post it wherever they like, sell it, whatever. It doesn't require any special expertise or software and without imposing a whole new regimen of DRM in hardware and software (which would be much worse), there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Doesn't matter whether the image comes from SmugMug, Dgrin, the MOMA, the US government, or Sony. I think most people here understand that, and those who are making a living from photography are careful to use watermarks and limit the size of the images they post. But for those who haven't gotten the message yet,

    OFFICIAL WARNING: When you make something available on the Internet, it becomes available on the Internet.

    mwink.gif

    That's actually a fairly simple, but somewhat crude way to grab an image. Remember that you have already downloaded the image to your hard-drive. For those with even a little web knowledge, your go-to tool is the debugger built right into most browsers. It gives you a list of all assets and even allows you to make changes on the fly. This will circumvent all of the right-click prevention currently available.

    Your warning is accurate. Whatever you post becomes available to anyone determined enough to get it. Your only recourse is to limit the size and add your watermark.

    Mike
    flickr
    I welcome your feedback, but leave the editing to me - thanks!
  • AlexSharkAlexShark Registered Users Posts: 198 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2015
    David_S85 wrote: »
    I just turned off external embedding in that gallery

    David, show me your most protected image, and I'll make it appear in my smugmug gallery within about 3 min. As an exercise.

    If the image is on my screen -- it is already in my computer, and I can save it to disk with a single keyboard shortcut: save/print screen. The internal organization of the providing server is irrelevant.

    So why don't we just get on with photography. DGrin is as safe as the next site, no need to halt production!
    Photography is about what does not meet the eye
    Be my guest: Alex Braverman Photography
  • black mambablack mamba Registered Users Posts: 8,319 Major grins
    edited February 9, 2015
    AlexShark wrote: »
    David, show me your most protected image, and I'll make it appear in my smugmug gallery within about 3 min. As an exercise.

    If the image is on my screen -- it is already in my computer, and I can save it to disk with a single keyboard shortcut: save/print screen. The internal organization of the providing server is irrelevant.

    So why don't we just get on with photography. DGrin is as safe as the next site, no need to halt production!

    Well, I've learned one important fact from this thread. NO site is really safe from being heisted. I do appreciate that Dgrin is willing to do what they can to help. And I'm very glad that most of the folks on our forum can live with the status quo and its vulnerabilities.

    I enjoy, immensely, the quality of work seen here. Many of our shooters have real skills and I certainly intend to follow their activity and comment on their work. Good luck to all of you.

    Elvis has left the building.

    Tom
    I always wanted to lie naked on a bearskin rug in front of a fireplace. Cracker Barrel didn't take kindly to it.
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited February 12, 2015
    I took a step back from this for a few days to let my emotions settle down so that I could objectively assess the issue.


    It is my conclusion that SmugMug/Dgrin has shown very poor moral (good faith) character in dealing with, not only this particular instance, but previous similar ones as well.


    I have in this thread repeatedly asked questions with regard to SmugMug/Dgrin's position on these moral (good faith) issues. Not one reply was issued to address any of them.

    SmugMug/Dgrin did start to address the technical issues only after continued pressure from members. That in itself is not only very troubling, but also telling.


    Add these two positions together and we get a view of a company that is calculating, not complacent. It is obvious, and was even passingly mentioned, that if these issues where to be made known to the Dgrin masses, it would hurt Dgrin and most likely SmugMug.


    Baldy, the owner was notified of the issue, and CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND!



    The common tactic, to hope the issue just dies and goes away, apparently has once again worked for SmugMug/Dgrin.

    This is a calculated response from SmugMug/Dgrin's owners and management. To put the interest of SmugMug/Dgrin BEFORE it's members interest. Letting the wolves feed on the members legal rights, while SmugMug/Dgrin sits back and let's them feed, stealing all the members images as they wish, and CHOOSING NOT TO NOTIFY Dgrin members of the threat.

    This is of such low character that I can't even express my disdain for it.


    This type of action will eventually catch-up with SmugMug/Dgrin. Whether it be from lost memberships/accounts, or from legal action.

    Make no mistake, its heading your way...
    Randy
  • JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
    edited February 12, 2015
    Randy

    You can't put this all on Dgrin and smugmug. All these external sites pulling your images is easily discoverable with routine site maintenance and oversight of your smugmug account. They made the tools available.
    Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.
  • ian408ian408 Administrators Posts: 21,904 moderator
    edited February 12, 2015
    Randy, I'm sorry you feel this way. Everyone who works on the site, behind the scenes or day-to-day, cares more than you give them credit for.

    A lot of us, myself included, volunteer our time to manage dgrin and to provide you with a great place to share images and talk about photography. The volunteers provide you 24x7x365 of service and provide timely answers for your questions. Sometimes, things take a little longer to resolve and this was one of them. I'm truly sorry for that.

    A lot goes on behind the scenes, most of which you don't see and for you to suggest I don't have the moral character is beyond offensive-the job I do for dgrin (and ultimately you), I treat with every sense of urgency and "moral character" I would if I were being paid.

    It's also offensive to me that you think we read your comments and "just hope the issue goes away". That couldn't be farther from the truth. If it was, we wouldn't discuss issues like these in a public forum; we'd hide them in a way they couldn't be viewed by others.

    Again, I am sorry we didn't meet your expectations.

    rwells wrote: »
    I took a step back from this for a few days to let my emotions settle down so that I could objectively assess the issue.


    It is my conclusion that SmugMug/Dgrin has shown very poor moral (good faith) character in dealing with, not only this particular instance, but previous similar ones as well.


    I have in this thread repeatedly asked questions with regard to SmugMug/Dgrin's position on these moral (good faith) issues. Not one reply was issued to address any of them.

    SmugMug/Dgrin did start to address the technical issues only after continued pressure from members. That in itself is not only very troubling, but also telling.


    Add these two positions together and we get a view of a company that is calculating, not complacent. It is obvious, and was even passingly mentioned, that if these issues where to be made known to the Dgrin masses, it would hurt Dgrin and most likely SmugMug.


    Baldy, the owner was notified of the issue, and CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND!



    The common tactic, to hope the issue just dies and goes away, apparently has once again worked for SmugMug/Dgrin.

    This is a calculated response from SmugMug/Dgrin's owners and management. To put the interest of SmugMug/Dgrin BEFORE it's members interest. Letting the wolves feed on the members legal rights, while SmugMug/Dgrin sits back and let's them feed, stealing all the members images as they wish, and CHOOSING NOT TO NOTIFY Dgrin members of the threat.

    This is of such low character that I can't even express my disdain for it.


    This type of action will eventually catch-up with SmugMug/Dgrin. Whether it be from lost memberships/accounts, or from legal action.

    Make no mistake, its heading your way...
    Moderator Journeys/Sports/Big Picture :: Need some help with dgrin?
Sign In or Register to comment.