Question about links to images

Post Reply New Topic

Which is the preferred way of linking to images found on websites / news articles?

1. To make a link directly to that web site.

or

2. To copy that image to something like PhotoBucket first then link to that?

I ask because there are potential issues with both:
With the first there is nothing to stop the owner of the image substituting that image with a different, possibly pornographic or otherwise unsuitable image. I know some web sites have been know to do this for "fun". That would of course get the poster of the image on wp into trouble for something they were innocent of.

The problem with the second apart from the extra hassle is that it technically breaches the image copyright by copying it. I know people don't tend to care about such niceties but I just wondered what the official wp position is on image linking - does it have one?

I think direct links are probably the preferred method. If, as you suggest, a site might substitute a pornographic image for an innocuous one, that WOULD be the link poster's fault - for making the link to such an unpleasant site.

Copying to photobucket, for example, would be entirely at the risk of the poster. I actually find such copying quite annoying, as it detaches the image from the site concerned. When an image is interesting, it's nice to be able to use the link to view the site hosting it.

OK that sounds fair enough. I don't know if anyone on wp has ever fallen foul of an image switch. I think I've just got my I.T. security head on at the moment looking for possible loopholes and problems where they may not be much of an issue in the real world. With some links though it is not possible to tell if the original poster is "unpleasant" if the link is to something like Flikr or a "harmless" blog.

I read recently of some senior politician using photos on someone else's web site without permission by linking to them. The original and copyright owner of the photos was so annoyed at all the extra bandwidth he was indirectly paying for that he photoshopped the images to be pornographic versions of the politician in question. Apparently the politicians web site became very popular for 24 hours before they pulled the links.

It depends on why you are linking to an image ... but many websites actively block third-party websites linking to their images ... as they are essentially STEALING the bandwidth (and the copyright issue is just as prominent if you link as if you copy the file)

Two rules ...

1. Ask First
2. Follow the wishes of the site owner

I think it's disingenuous for site owners to block third parties from embedding images from websites. I don't do it with Wrong Planet (people embed images we host and I don't see it as stealing bandwidth) and I also don't have a problem with embedding an image from a trustworthy site on wrong planet as long as the image is not wide enough to disrupt the forum page layout.