Karma
 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 9
Karma
Originally Posted by Longshots
Errr ... you mean it obviously is the case - you are depriving the owner of (amongst other possible things) the money that he would have earned from selling that work.
Last edited by Tannin; 25-05-2011 at 1:34pm.
There is an easy solution to this that does not embroil you in the scenario, and does not leave you open to any claims of slander.
In FB, browse to the page of the person claiming to have taken the pics.
Take a screen capture of the page, and some screen captures of the individual pics.
E-Mail them to the person you believe took the pics with a polite FYI.
Do not state that they are anything, just comment on the similarity to there own pics.
It is then up to the professional photographer to decide on if they wish to pursue it. You have not made any accusations, just a commented on similarity.
Either you're part of the problem or you're part of the solution or you're just part of the landscape.
What man is a man who does not make the world better.
Errr ... you mean it obviously is the case - you are depriving the owner of (amongst other possible things) the money that hewouldmight have have earned from selling that work.
And on it goes still...
Maybe I should've been clearer. Depriving someone of the thing they are charged with thieving. Damages lost income and whatever else obviously (or perhaps not so obviously) would come separately.
If you stole someone's car, and then he lost his job because he couldn't get there.. you wouldn't be charged with stealing his job as well is what I'm saying.
In the eyes of the law, there is no "might" here. You stole it, therefore (in law) the damages DO exist - there is no "might".
Exactly. The money they owe you for use of the work. That is your money, they have deprived you of it. In law, there are no two ways about it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote