Messages

1

UK Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Can we just 'bottom line' this ?

« on: September 23, 2014, 08:56:44 AM »

if the image was on a server, obviously it was "copied", and if that image is not in a password protected directory/folder, it's basically publicly facing and is an open target for many bots/ spiders /scrapers /snoopers / fuskers ect..including picscout.

I help a small charity & we have a "Getty" letter which we may deal with later (we inadvertently may be guilty and being honest we would be willing to pay a small amount not an extortionate sum for a small part of an image).
But have any solicitors on here had a look at picscout? Does anyone have server logs showing it's progress through the server? My contention is that picscout should be illegal under the computer misuse act 1990 + amendments. A web server invites people to look at the content of a website as defined by the http (hyper text links) it appears that picscout searches the server beyond the http links & downloads assorted files, from areas where the public are not invited.
An analogy is: you are invited to view the beautiful displays in a garden, you try the house door, it is unlocked so you go in and rummage around and take some information and possibly sensitive data and an amount of bandwidth. I would have thought that was a crime.
Any legal people like to comment please. ( I am not a lawyer and I get easily confused )