On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 08:38:38AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > Mark Roberts wrote: > > David Savage wrote: > > > >> <http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=76588> > > > > Short version: Australia's Virgin Mobile phone company ran an ad > > campaign using photos from Flickr that had been posted under Creative > > Commons licensing. One of the people shown in one of the photos is > > suing. > > > > "The images have been featured within the positive spirit of the > > Creative Commons Agreement, a legal framework voluntarily chosen by the > > photographers," the statement said. > > > > True enough, but if there's a person recognizable in the photo, you > > still need a model release. > > > > Even shorter version: Virgin messed up badly! > > > > > > Oh yeah, big time. No release. Sure, they used the photo legally > according to its license, but they don't have a model release, and that > is going to bite them in the *ss.
I think their lawyers could well argue the fault lies with the original publisher (who in this case would be the photographer). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
