So to further muddy the waters, despite Google's claim that they will delete the site and all associated accounts, a...
So to further muddy the waters, despite Google's claim that they will delete the site and all associated accounts, a Reddit thread reports that Internet Archive is planning to archive G+ for posterity. What if, like me, you have posted your intellectual property (copyrighted artworks) to the site? Would you agree that the wisest thing to do is to delete the account, asap, further accelerating the race against time... and anyway, wasn't this planned for August?
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/17/18269707/internet-archive-archiveteam-preserving-public-google-plus-posts
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/17/18269707/internet-archive-archiveteam-preserving-public-google-plus-posts
Carla Strozzieri G+ will be gone on the 2nd of April, not August as originally announced by Google. Archiving in the "Wayback Machine" is underway. Your copyrighted artworks may have already been archived. Your copyrights should also have conveyed. Deleting your account at this point will prevent archiving only if your contents have not already been processed. The Internet Archive, owners of the Wayback Machine, can, if requested, remove your materials.
ReplyDeletehelp.archive.org - How do I remove an item page from the site?
Jeff Diver
ReplyDeleteThank you, Jeff. I have downloaded my takeout files and had a look at them, but I am not certain what the identifier [ITEMID1] is, as referred to in the attached article. I assume that I would find that in the documentation that is in the same folder as the image, or is it the image number? Would the path be Takeout > Google+ Stream > Photos > Photos from Posts > [date] > and then *either the number on the photo itself or some other identifier on one of those CSV files in that folder?* It would help immensely if I knew what they are asking for.
Your help with this is very much appreciated.
Also, good to know that my © will follow, since it may take some time to manage this.
I know several people who deleted their account in early March because of the tools Google added to the takeout system (I think it was there) to backup and move communities (including photos, I presume). You retain your copyright, but that doesn't give a community moderator etc rights to upload it on a different service. This is considerably different than the Internet Archive though, but I think it is a bigger deal. I would have deleted my account but I participated in very few communities in terms of sharing my photography and I know those are not being exported anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteMichael Russell You are exactly right about this. I am a moderator in an art community. When I downloaded my files, I was surprised to find that the bulk of the 10G download consisted of other people's photo files. This is concerning.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I did not prefer Communities, (which I personally attribute to G+'s demise), I participated in many of them. Unfortunately, they fragmented the organic arts community that had been coordinating online shows, and otherwise organizing a variety of creative group activities. I posted to those communities as a way of bridging the fragments, and there are a lot of them. So as I result there are some fifty community owners and their moderators who may now have my work!
On the bright side, I can say is that the image quality of those downloads is grainy, since they are apparently greatly compressed. I was unaware of the takeout apparatus added in March and the fact that other community members could potentially download my work. As it stands now, the damage is already done and the best I can do is to register my copyrights asap.
Carla Strozzieri I hope others can answer your specific questions regarding Google+ Takeout. I have been using the creation of Alois Bělaška called Google+ Exporter. One of the advantages of that software is that Alois himself is very responsive to questions regarding his product.
ReplyDeleteI think that you and Michael Russell raise some excellent points. Google is allowing Community members, such as myself, to download Community content. Once a member has downloaded the material, it is in their hands to dispose. I had thought that Community downloads would be restricted to Moderators and Owners, but that is not the case.
For most G+ Communities, this might not be a big deal. For art and photography Communities, however, copyright violation may have been made more of a problem than it would have been if Community downloading had been restricted to Mods and Owners.
Jeff Diver Sort of two different things there though Jeff. I do take issue with Google adding this capability to Takeout, as distributing our content in an importable elsewhere form is not something that was the case when we signed up (in TOS etc). However, one engineer (you may have read that in EA) did claim that the Disable Downloads (or whatever it may actually be called) button we have for photos in our profile settings will be honored by the Takeout software. I have no tested this to be true, but I hope that it is. The other side of things is that Google+ Exporter software - which just takes whatever is public facing. I don't like that his can go beyond what someone has posted to their own profile, but it is not Google's doing at least. Everyone and anyone has been able to scrape public facing content previous to this, that is the nature of being on the web, but I don't like seeing Google facilitate it themselves with Takeout.
ReplyDeleteJeff Diver Jeff, to clarify, I downloaded my whole file through Takeout and the only community files I got were the one that I was monitoring. So I'm not sure if the community members can download files.Also, the community I was monitoring was inactive for a good while, and I still got about 7GB of files. I can't imagine how big those files from other communities are.
ReplyDeleteDo you happen to know that answer as to what file description Internet Achieve is asking for? I feel the clock ticking that in light of this conversation I need to get off this site.
Carla Strozzieri I found communities to be great for discussion (such as this one) but less so for sharing photographs, so I seldom utilized them for that purpose. I think I am one of the lucky ones. Also, as you may have read in my reply to Jeff above, Google claims that if we had disabled photo downloads in our profile, takeout will not get those images out of communities either. I haven't tested that, but if you have that setting turned on it might be of some help. I also register my copyrights - do you actively search for infringements? I suspect any fallout of the above issues may be with the images showing up on other networks as they are imported, but they may wind up in other usage scenarios as well.
ReplyDeleteMichael Russell You may be right about the disable downloads option. One thing I noticed is that I didn't see any of my own work in that community file. I'm going to check it again thoroughly to see if I can draw any conclusions.
ReplyDeleteMichael Russell
ReplyDeleteThere is much to be said about this process. Some of it is disheartening, but also there is a silver lining for me. For one thing, it is getting me to register my copyrights, which I have procrastinated until now. I spent the day familiarizing with the process. But also, your comment about the disable downloads is reassuring, because I am very careful about such things and have always disabled downloads. As mentioned above, I do not see my work in the community file I downloaded.
I search my name regularly, but how does one search for infringements? By doing an image search?
Also, since you seem to be knowledgeable about such, is there a way to accurately identify which website are stripping metadata from images? I found some old information, but nothing up to date. Is there a sure way of ascertaining this? I'm trying to decide my next move.
Michael Russell Also, Michael, can you direct me to where Google says they will not allow downloads through communities if download shares are turned off? That would offer some peace of mind.
ReplyDeleteCarla Strozzieri Once you get the registration into a habit and regular part of whatever workflow you have it isn't so bad. Catching up after not doing it for a while is much harder than doing it regularly (especially when trying to determine publication dates etc).
ReplyDeleteI don't tend to search my name as that is seldom included when a photo of mine is used somewhere without permission. This article is a bit out of date and I need to rewrite it but my general process in finding infringements is still about the same. You could start with an extension that just does google reverse search, as that finds the bulk of them:
https://www.mrussellphotography.com/blog/finding-copyright-infringements-web/
As for the community where that download info was posted I'm afraid I can't share that link - it was in a private community.
Michael Russell Thank you so much. I don't know what a google reverse extension is, but have a feeling I will find out once I read your article. Much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteAs for the no community downloads, I did a fast check through one of the folders from the art community I monitor and found two pieces of my own work. It could be because it was 'my' download, but I have no way of knowing that.
Yes, I have procrastinated the copyrights for a while, and now they only allow small batches of ten works per group, but I am happy to get this kick in the butt to get me to refocus what needs to be done from here out. I am very sorry to see G+ go, but making the best of a new start, in many aspects. I've learned a lot through this break up.
Carla Strozzieri If you have any questions about reverse image searches after reading my post, feel free to send me an email. :)
ReplyDeleteCarla Strozzieri >"Do you happen to know that answer as to what file description Internet Achieve is asking for?" No. I have been archiving posts from one of my blogs and they take the complete html code, as far as I can tell. Edward Morbius, is this something you might know? My technical knowledge is limited.
ReplyDeleteMichael Russell Thank you Michael. I've had a quick look at your article and it looks very interesting. It may take some time before I fully explore that subject (still sorting out copyrights), but I will definitely be looking into it and the contact is much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I am surprised at the numerous artists who seem unconcerned about infringements and terms of service agreements.
Jeff Diver Thank you. I did send Internet Archive an email asking them that same question, but I suspect they may be receiving a lot of mail at present. : )
ReplyDelete