IMAGES

[Raptor]

We have been working on clarifying the use of images within posts. To this end stooz has updated the "rules" (see above).

Here is the updated text:-

All embedded images (including data and graphs) in posts must:-
Include an additional link (URL) to a web page where the original may be viewed in context, or
Where the image is hosted on either a domain owned or controlled by the poster, or a hosting site account (e.g. Imgur, Picasa, Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive) be followed by a statement that the poster owns (or is legally permitted to post) the content of the image.
If this is later to be found to be incorrect, appropriate action will be taken by administrators.
Images which do not comply with these requirements may be removed without warning.

Raptor.

[mc2fool]

Include an additional link (URL) to a web page where the original may be viewed in context

Does making the image itself the link (embed [img] in [url]) count?

[NomoneyNohoney]

We have been working on clarifying the use of images within posts. To this end stooz has updated the "rules" (see above).

Here is the updated text:-

All embedded images (including data and graphs) in posts must:-
Include an additional link (URL) to a web page where the original may be viewed in context, or
Where the image is hosted on either a domain owned or controlled by the poster, or a hosting site account (e.g. Imgur, Picasa, Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive) be followed by a statement that the poster owns (or is legally permitted to post) the content of the image.
If this is later to be found to be incorrect, appropriate action will be taken by administrators.
Images which do not comply with these requirements may be removed without warning.

Raptor.

Please forgive the pedantry, but are you stipulating this just for embedded images? If so, why not just stick with only allowing hyperlinks and avoid the issue (unless of course embedded images are that desirable a feature...)

[chas49]

Include an additional link (URL) to a web page where the original may be viewed in context

Does making the image itself the link (embed [img] in [url]) count?

Appreciate the smiley - but no that isn't 'enough' - it needs to be a link to a page where the image can be seen in context, or a statement that the OP 'owns' the image (or otherwise has the right to post it).

[chas49]

Please forgive the pedantry, but are you stipulating this just for embedded images? If so, why not just stick with only allowing hyperlinks and avoid the issue (unless of course embedded images are that desirable a feature...)

Good question

I think the view was that some embedded images (e.g. graphs / data tables) might add value. I guess we might change our minds (or Stooz/Clariman might anyway - it's their site, their rules) if we end up with a lot of images which don't add value.

[PinkDalek]

Does the copyright part of the "Rules" need beefing up?

They state:

Please respect copyright holders. Where LemonFool considers that the copyright of others may be infringed, posts will be edited or deleted. In general, it is fine to quote a short extract from another source, provided due credit is given and a URL link to the originating site is provided. However, copying large sections of text from elsewhere is likely to infringe copyright and will be deleted.

Other than the opening two sentences, they do not appear to cover the misuse of copyrighted images, which the extract shown in the OP would appear to permit, if an URL link is also provided. Maybe that's covered by the second sentence above but I'm not certain.

[mc2fool]

it needs to be a link to a page where the image can be seen in context.

It is a link to the page where the image can be seen in context. Try clicking it (the lemons in my previous post) and you will see.

[chas49]

it needs to be a link to a page where the image can be seen in context.

It is a link to the page where the image can be seen in context. Try clicking it (the lemons in my previous post) and you will see.

Oh! Sorry - didn't bother clicking it. I think the rule asks for an additional URL so that mods can see it - but we'll discuss that amongst ourselves elsewhere.