Should I be worried?

**Jock Scot** · 24th October 13, 03:37 AM

I have posted many pictures on this website over the years and have had no worries whatsoever. However, The last picture that I posted in the " good buys on tattersall shirts" (Post 52), thread has got me wondering. I inadvertantly "clicked on" (twice I think) my posted picture and up came access to all my pictures stored on photobucket. There is nothing there that I am personally worried about anyone else seeing------although the mods will have a heart attack at some of the "Rule 11" stuff!

Anyway, four questions arise from this:-

1. Has this always occurred and I have just not noticed?
2. I assume that others on this website could "click on" to my photobucket picture library, by "clicking on" my published(on xmarks) picture and view what is there?
3. If they can, could they publish, without my consent, a picture from my collection?
4. Should I be worried?

Thoughts please? Thanks.

Sorry this should have been posted the the technical questions section. Please mods, move it if you feel the need.

**Calgacus** · 24th October 13, 03:49 AM

Hi Jock,

I don't use Photobucket personally, preferring Flickr, but the same applies to both.

1. Yes, looks that way.

2. Yes, as far as I am aware, this has always been the case. It's certainly the case with other Photobucket pictures posted on this site.

3. Yes.

4. Only if you've posted stuff on Photobucket that you don't want shared or downloaded by anybody else. Flickr has a setting for each photo to make it public or private, Photobucket may have something similar.

I suppose the bottom line is anything that you publish on the internet is de facto public property unless you go out of your way to make sure it is private. You might want to look at Google Drive, or Dropbox, where you can store stuff privately but access it remotely and share it if you wish.

Cheers,

Richard.

**Grizzly** · 24th October 13, 04:05 AM

Jock I have to agree with Richard above, it largely depends on whether you have "shared" your pictures on Photobucket. It is a public website used for photo sharing which means that anyone could "steal" your photos and republish them elsewhere. In general that is not a problem unless there are photos that you dont want to be made public in which case you are better off just storing them elsewhere such as a separate hard drive, flash drive or backed up to CD.
Also never store photos on a photosharing website at full resolution. PC screens only need 72ppi to render a decent image on a screen whereas a print will need a minimum of 200-300 ppi for decent quality. I know this is a bit technical as most people just download what is on their cameras, but it does pay to be a bit savvy about these things.

In short dont upload on to photobucket or flickr anything that you dont want anyone to see or "borrow".

**Father Bill** · 24th October 13, 04:43 AM

If you give the key to your house to the cleaning lady, who's to say she didn't make copies for her friends? If you give your photos to somebody else to keep for you, who's to say . . . .

**creagdhubh** · 24th October 13, 05:12 AM

Originally Posted by Grizzly

Jock I have to agree with Richard above, it largely depends on whether you have "shared" your pictures on Photobucket. It is a public website used for photo sharing which means that anyone could "steal" your photos and republish them elsewhere. In general that is not a problem unless there are photos that you dont want to be made public in which case you are better off just storing them elsewhere such as a separate hard drive, flash drive or backed up to CD.
Also never store photos on a photosharing website at full resolution. PC screens only need 72ppi to render a decent image on a screen whereas a print will need a minimum of 200-300 ppi for decent quality. I know this is a bit technical as most people just download what is on their cameras, but it does pay to be a bit savvy about these things.

In short dont upload on to photobucket or flickr anything that you dont want anyone to see or "borrow".

Excellent advice, Simon.

**Jock Scot** · 24th October 13, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by Father Bill

If you give the key to your house to the cleaning lady, who's to say she didn't make copies for her friends? If you give your photos to somebody else to keep for you, who's to say . . . .

As I have said, there is nothing on my photobucket account that I am personally worried about, but I take your point Bill. I also realised that pictures of mine, once they are stored on photobucket, become "puplic property" of a kind. What I did not realise is how easy access was by "clicking on" a published picture on a website such as this one. Again, I personally am not concerned at the content of my photobucket collection. Most are my personal pictures, some-----a very few-----are off the internet anyway and many of my pictures have been seen on this website at one time or another, but-----------BUT------------ there is a wider question here.

Are the management here(xmarks) going to be upset at the "rule 11" content there? Talking more widely, what about assorted rule breaking pictures stored in good faith on other members photobucket accounts, that could be accessed via the similar route? ----- Just wondering?

**Chas** · 24th October 13, 05:23 AM

I would agree with all of the above and add this; it you give your pictures titles or descriptions, it gives search engines something to look for. So your picture "Day at the Seaside", would come up when anybody searches Google images for either day or seaside.

If members use proper housekeeping; put pictures in different folders; set the privacy level for each folder, there is usually no problem.

Except that people can still steal pictures if they want to. It is almost expected. I use FireFox and one of my addons is Photobucket - I can right click on any picture, anywhere, and add it to my own bucket.

**Calgacus** · 24th October 13, 05:28 AM

I would have thought that since the act of clicking on the link to Photobucket navigates the user away from the X-Marks website, any content (other than that directly linked to) would not be covered by the rules.

In other words, if I link to a Photobucket picture here, I must abide by the rules with regards to that photo because I am posting a link to and/or displaying a copy of that image here on X-Marks. Once a user follows that link to Photobucket, they are 'outside the jurisdiction' of X-Marks, and my images must abide by the rules of Photobucket instead.

That would be my interpretation of the situation anyway, though of course the Moderators may correct me.

**Mike in Dayton** · 24th October 13, 05:30 AM

I checked one of my pictures in the thread for headwear. When I click on the photo I get the left-right arrow but can not navigate to the next picture (made sure that Photobucket window did not show me as "logged in"). I have my settings for that album as "private". So check the security settings for the picture and album. When I put something online, especially a photo, I ask myself if this is something I would show my mother. If not, then I don't post it.

Mike

**GRKilt** · 24th October 13, 05:34 AM

I read Rule 11 as a "don't discuss it here" rule. It would be odd to apply that rule so broadly as to affect your other internet activity. It would probably also be practically unenforceable as who would want to click through all the external links to make sure the are Xmarks safe?

it may be different if you started a thread on Xmarks that said, hey, check out my blog to see me Rule 11 in a kilt. That would probably warrant Rule 11 enforcement as to the individual thread. But not the blog.