When is a watermark not a watermark?

• 29.08.2023 21:34 UTC+02:00
• [ perma(?)link ]
• < previous | next >

Google's development of software to detect AI-created images gives the BBC's tech gurus the opportunity to edumacate us on the use of watermarks to protect images.

Watermarks are typically a logo or text added to an image to show ownership, as well as partially to make it trickier for the picture to be copied and used without permission. It is in images used on the BBC News website, which usually include a copyright watermark in the bottom-left corner.

Tom Gerken and Philippa Wain, BBC News

Yeah…but no. For Gerken and friend seem to have got themselves into a bit of a pickle, hohoho! [tumbleweed]

What our technoweenie twosome have described here as a copyright watermark on the BBC News website isn't actually a watermark at all. A watermark would be embedded into the image and not easily removable.

It is a copyright acknowledgement, but it's not embedded within the image; instead, it's a separate text element which is added to the site's HTML code and floats above the image. The image itself can be simply saved from the page without the text.

This is the HTML used to set the image on the page and apply the copyright notice to it (highlighted below). The position and appearance of the notice is handled by CSS (not shown).

If they can't even get the basics of their own site's technology correct, what hope is there?