May 2010
12 years of piracy, plagiarism and copyright abuse.
It has now been 12 years since ArtistScope first introduced copy protection to
the Internet. Before then there was nothing available at all to
copy protect images
or web page content at all. Since then ArtistScope has developed
innovative solutions to cater for almost every application of media.
All of these solutions have been unique and even today remain as the most
secure copy protection software available.
But along the way our solutions have constantly been threatened by untold
influences, mainly from browser developers trying to make content as accessible
as possible regardless of copyright and privacy rights, and mainly from what we
have always referred to as the "monkey-brains".
The browser makers have always been keen to make everything on the web as
accessible as possible, enforcing copyright over their own resources while exposing
every one else's property to plagiarism and copyright abuse. To make their
browser more popular, they have not only turned their back on artistic license
and rights, but openly flaunt their intent by advertising their products as the
one to to use to get the most for nothing. On top of that we
have seen hundreds of developers providing clones of apps for copying, capturing,
searching and grabbing all types of files with absolutely no consideration to rights of ownership.
Of course these same developers will protect their own developments vehemently
and expect you to pay for the right to use their software. Where that gets more ridiculous is that in most cases they plagiarized some
open-source project to
begin with. So we have hundreds of screen capture programs all using the same code and
methods; hundreds of different file converters all using the same code; and
hundreds of site grabbers and movie downloaders!
For anyone publishing content and trying to copy protect it or
restrict its redistribution, it's an endless task. And for
ArtistScope it gets worse because not only do we have
to maintain that our solutions keep abreast
of browser changes and security holes as they appear, but we also have to
contend with the fact that our research and development costs do not get returned.
In 1998 when we invented image encryption for use on web pages nearly every
amateur Java developer offered a simple applet as a comparative solution...
looks like it does the same thing but in actuality is totally different because
an image is not secure in a normal applet. But they promoted their product
and falsely advertised it using terminology that we invented.
In 1999 we released CopySafe Web
Protection which was secure from
PrintScreen and screen
capture to later be confronted with two new competitors, Alchemedia and
Vyou, each with more 20 million
in public funding. While denying any
acknowledgement that our solution even existed, their developers monitored and
continually tried to hack our web sites. Anything that was
new was immediately reflected on their home pages. One even
had the audacity to take out a patent that
better described our solution... they were not even using Java or image
encryption at all, and they didn't know how to. Vyou disappeared not long after we threatened to sue for piracy and
breaches of Copyright. Alchemedia disappeared shortly after when their funds
ran out.
But the monkey-brains keep coming out of the woodwork. I remember not too long
ago stumbling across what looked like it could be a competitive solution and
while reading their home page, I thought that it seemed familiar...
they had copied the page directly from our web site and simply replaced the company name.
How incredible is it that the vendors of copy protection solutions are no
better than the thieves that their clients need protection from?
Yes this is an off topic and one that we have always avoided, but after looking
back over the 12 years that we have devoted to the protection of content on the
web, mostly what we see is just more and more piracy and the deprivation of
getting paid for our developments. By not mentioning it is certainly not going
to slow them down so if they want to continue let's expose them for what they
really are!
But the most amusing part is that the "monkey-brains" have no hesitation in contacting our support
team for help in solving their security/design issues. If all of these DRM and
copy protection developers really "are the leaders in their field"
and "were established in 1998" as they
claim, then why do they all use ArtistScope copy
protection software and documentation as the
industry standard?
Sincerely but not amused,
William Kent
ArtistScope Team Manager
* In 2011 ArtistScope released their own web browser,
ArtisBrowser, to support the
ArtistScope Site
Protection System (ASPS) and cater for the cross-purposed
features of popular web browsers. Then in late 2015 all popular web
browsers dropped support for real (NPAPI) plugins in favor of
surface apps used by mobile phones. Consequently that was the end of
all other web page protection software because they were no longer
supported by web browsers. Today, only ArtistScope web protection
software can be used. That is, web protection software that is
worthwhile using, because most others rely on JavaScript which can
easily be disabled and has no permission to integrate at system
level where is where copy protection needs to be actioned.
Back to Press Releases