Funny, makes me wonder if there's any pictures of me plastered across a shop window. Unlikely, since I doubt it would help them to sell anything (maybe masks).
And they're offering a bottle of wine as compensation. Pretty cheap advertising!
LOL, not even... Store owner said IF they lived in his country he'd give them a bottle of "good" wine. But since they don't, they are SOL. What cracks me up about that is the implication that the store also sells "bad" wine, jejeje™
And they're offering a bottle of wine as compensation. Pretty cheap advertising!
LOL, not even... Store owner said IF they lived in his country he'd give them a bottle of "good" wine. But since they don't, they are SOL. What cracks me up about that is the implication that the store also sells "bad" wine, jejeje™
R.
My slant on this was that being "North American" they probably would't know the difference.
on the other extreme, i read somewhere back about a lawyer trolling 3rd world countries, looking for people who's images had been used commercially without proper releases by agencies that know better. basically, he had clippings of stuff and he just went rambling about, tracking down subjects. if he found them and didn't find any paperwork, he'd file suit on their behalf...
on the other extreme, i read somewhere back about a lawyer trolling 3rd world countries, looking for people who's images had been used commercially without proper releases by agencies that know better. basically, he had clippings of stuff and he just went rambling about, tracking down subjects. if he found them and didn't find any paperwork, he'd file suit on their behalf...
She posted a full-rez version of the photo on the internet (at twittermoms.com or something) apparently. I read through her blog entry earlier in the week but I'm not convinced that her photographer, who has stock photo accounts on various sites, didn't just sell the image through stock and is now refusing to admit it.
