Is there a way to right click protect a wordpress site

Some templates do include this protection - but you can always add it with a plugin. IMO though - it's not worth it.

Using a carefully chosen watermark is a better deterrent - but nothing is impossible to overcome. If it's viewable online, it can be stolen.

Mike Deep wrote in post #16192195
It's not an extra step. It's annoying and has no practical value where image protection is concerned.

That's not true. The average person isnt in to hacking and will try to right click pictures, and when they cant, they will move along....So yes, it is an extra step so to speak. Some people might figure a way around it, but a good percentage aren't that interested in it and just move along. Someone who is highly committed to stealing images... well nothing will stop them.

I can if I want easily get an image from a right click protected website by simply using a keycommand for the source code. Its common knowledge you cant protect them unless splashed with watermarks. Sorry but thats just how the Internet is.
Also right click protection has a habbit of causing more harm than good for some reason, anyone who uses it I simply back off and keep looking, thats not good is it.
Ofcourse, this does not mean I support image theft though!

abbypanda wrote in post #16193220
That's not true. The average person isnt in to hacking and will try to right click pictures, and when they cant, they will move along....So yes, it is an extra step so to speak. Some people might figure a way around it, but a good percentage aren't that interested in it and just move along. Someone who is highly committed to stealing images... well nothing will stop them.

Just that right-clicking is used for more than stealing photos.

Some people right-click to translate pages - and they might not realize the difference between right-clicking above text or above an image.

Right-clicking is also used to add page to favourites. Or to view EXIF information. Or force the browser the view the image in case you have low bandwidth or there have been some network issues making the browser not picking up the image. Or viewing a scaled image in a separate tab, allowing zoom in/out without also scaling any text and layout around the image.

Depending on which browser people use, there are a number of other function also affected by right-clicks.

There are addons that will make it easy to see all media files on a web page, making it a snap to select and save whatever media was displayed. So people doesn't even need to view the HTML source to get access to photos. And I guess quite a lot of people who steal photos use Google or similar image search functionality, so they don't have to rely on how the image is presented on the original web page.

Then there is also the psychological impact of many of them. You are telling the user that they are a thief and can't be trusted. I know that I quickly pass on any website that is using an anti-right click script because I don't like dealing with people who assume I'm a thief when I'm not. I spend several times over on games with no or simple DRM schemes over what I will on titles with more annoying types.

abbypanda wrote in post #16193220
That's not true. The average person isnt in to hacking and will try to right click pictures, and when they cant, they will move along....So yes, it is an extra step so to speak. Some people might figure a way around it, but a good percentage aren't that interested in it and just move along. Someone who is highly committed to stealing images... well nothing will stop them.

It's not "hacking" and the average person won't be stopped by it. It's very simple: This kind of scripting does nothing, zilch, nada on Firefox and Chrome.

Maybe it would stop grandma using Internet Explorer 6, but then so would a watermark.

Mike Deep wrote in post #16193960
It's not "hacking" and the average person won't be stopped by it. It's very simple: This kind of scripting does nothing, zilch, nada on Firefox and Chrome.

Maybe it would stop grandma using Internet Explorer 6, but then so would a watermark.

Agreed with Mike here... except for the IE6 thing cause I think even IE6 had view source feature.

My take on this is that if you put stuff online, the time spent trying to mitigate that "risk" is not worth it.