On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Rebekah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > that can't be legal....
Well... Here's the thing: The zoo is private property (even if it's a publicly owned zoo, it's still private property). If one doesn't like that term in the contract one needn't buy a ticket and enter the zoo. And, what are they saying? They're only saying you can't use images taken on their property commercially. How are they going to know if you're using their photos commercially? They'll never know one's used them commercially until the photos are published, so in reality, all they can do is "harvest" the photo and use it for their own purposes (assuming they like it). I suppose if they're really pissed off, or if they really really like the photo they could take the photographer to court seeking an order that s/he hand over a high-res version or neg or whatever of the photo that's been "illegally" used. Keep in mind that all their remedies are civil, not criminal. They have no powers of seizure without court order, and they certainly have no powers of seizure while any photographer is engaged in their activities at the zoo itself. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
