Alan Womack wrote:
> I took a look at the engine, if you don't use descriptive names you won't be
>indexed in a usable manner. No on at google is doing to look at image0001.jpg
>files and decide that was a cake and note it in the index.
But that (not using descriptive terms) defeats the whole purpose of getting
one's website listed. The point here is not that the image is listed, but that
the Google site says that the images *might* be copyrighted,
when it should say that they *are* copyrighted (or some such thing).
Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC
>
>
> >> Harvey writes:
>
> >> > The possibility of losses is scary,
>
> >> What sort of losses? Do you do a lot of business in licensing thumbnail
> >> images
> >> or web-resolution images? Is there any reason why they would be stolen
> >> any less
> >> frequently from your own site than from any other site?
>
> Epson Inkjet Printer FAQ:
