14 replies to this topic

[EGOL]

I have a couple of sites that feature lots of images. Lots of my traffic is a result of these images and lots of people come to my site from the Google image SERPs.

Other people often like these images and place them on their site without permission or attribution. Damn Pirates!

A few months ago if I went to Google image search and queried my keywords I would see my images being displayed from lots of other domains. Today, if I search it seems that google now knows that the images belong to me because they are not being displayed from other domains.

Hat tip to Google for cleaning up the image SERPs and decreasing the traffic incentive for others to use my property without permission. This was essentially cleaning dupe content out of the image SERPs.

[A.N.Onym]

Do you mean that Google can identify what's shown in the image, rather than sort them by domain, filetype and size?

Thanks.

[EGOL]

A couple months ago if I did a search for "my keyword".... I could see dozens of sites with unauthorized use of my image. Today if I search I only see my own site feature for that image.

I have thousands of images in image search and I have checked the image SERPs for the main keywords for dozens of them and google has eliminated other domains who are using my images.

Google has figured out that those images belong to me and does not display other sites who are using them. From what I can see they have an accuracy rate of at least 95%.

[iamlost]

Interesting, EGOL.
If this continues to hold true then I might open my images back up to Google.

[jonbey]

Makes sense. If you filter the image search by date (OK, too late now I guess!) does only yours show up to start with? I was recently trying to find the source of an image that was being shared in SM and managed to find its first appearance in Google search by using the date filter - although the person who had the image on their site never replied to my mail!

I guess if Google are serious about making the whole web fairer then recognising images and ownership is the next thing after know who owns content.

Is +1 on images yet? I was something about that. Anyone seen or done it?

[EGOL]

If this continues to hold true then I might open my images back up to Google.

Oh... If you have them on your site and google does not know about them... but someone else has taken them... then google will probably see your site as the pirate!

[iamlost]

Oh... If you have them on your site and google does not know about them... but someone else has taken them... then google will probably see your site as the pirate!

...then Google will definitely see my DMCA...and has...and then responded appropriately most of the time...eventually all of the time due to incorporated 'copyright proofs'.

Actually, relatively few of my images get 'borrowed' probably because I have made it difficult to mass auto-scrape from my sites. A sad fact of the web is that Google properties/services are often 'the' prime target of scrapers, indeed was the final straw that caused me to disallow my images to Google - that and their failure to clean up the mess they facilitated.

If that has changed appropriately and stays so...

[rustybrick]

I wonder if it is related to http://insidesearch....hm-changes.html

Retiring a signal in Image search: As the web evolves, we often revisit signals that we launched in the past that no longer appear to have a significant impact. In this case, we decided to retire a signal in Image Search related to images that had references from multiple documents on the web.

[glyn]

I have made it difficult to mass auto-scrape from my sites.

I love a challenge.

[iamlost]

I love a challenge.

First Challenge: identify one of my sites.
I'm waiting....


I agree that mass autoscraping of any given site probably isn't impossible but sufficiently difficult defences do tend to remove all but the very best hackers from the battle - and they typically are targeting more 'AdSense prosperous' niches than mine.
Of course manual site scraping via low cost human drones will always be possible but that is a hacker admitting defeat. And when identified there are poison pill options available...

Damn, but the game is as addictive as as it is, at times, infuriating...

[EGOL]

I'm waiting....

I found one... check it out.

[AbleReach]

LMAO EGOL

[glyn]

First Challenge: identify one of my sites.
I'm waiting....

http://www.iamlost.com/

And to be honest mate, I expected a little bit more

[iamlost]

Sorry guys.

EGOL: my kitty hammock is a custom raw silk macrame design, quite unique. Although it was interesting to see what is available down market. Budget the luxuries first! Eat dessert first (and last)!!

And to be honest mate, I expected a little bit more

And to be honest mate, so did I...

iamlost is a web fora pseudonym by chosen by frustration default after the prior dozen or so choices I preferred were rejected during registration way back when. The associated domain name had been registered by someone else long before that. But it does serve as a nice bit of misdirection...
Note: I'm not a vanity licence plate domain name type of guy.

[jsteele823]

Do you mean that Google can identify what's shown in the image, rather than sort them by domain, filetype and size?

Thanks.

Check out the "similar" link when you hover over an image in google's image search.... You should see something like this.


I wonder what effect such a move will have for all the webmasters out there that rely on stock images for their media. I noticed that traffic on a site I worked on in the past (but still have GA access to) dropped virtually all of its image search traffic recently (all pictures were taken direct from the manufacturer).