Point taken,
But why then is any size image copyrighted?
I just have to say this one more time... it's not that a nefarious purpose
was suspected... it's that having a little pride in my images, I'd like to
know exactly what their terms of use is, especially given that I can expect
zero compensation... and for the last time I'll belabor it, if this was all
spelled out up front in an official manner, any worry, doubt, suspicion,
would have been avoided.
To me it would be blindingly obvious that a camera company would already
have loads of pictures to use w/o having to ask for more.
Tom C.
From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Pentax Wants Your Digital Pix
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 18:42:42 -0500
"John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On other lists, this request was made out of the blue without an
>introduction. Many people were suspicious, and on at least one list the
>message was deleted by admin as it was "obviously" bogus.
>
>You appear to have a more trusting nature than many other people, hence I
>thought you might be interested in one of my guaranteed
once-in-a-lifetime
>opportunities. :-)
Little trust was necessary in this case: The request was specifically
for small files that *couldn't* be used for anything other than screen
display. Anyone with nefarious purposes in mind wouldn't be advertising
their existence by sending messages to mailing lists asking for such
small images - they'd just steal them from the web. To me, this was
blindingly obvious from the start.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com
