<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Robert Rohde <<a href="mailto:rarohde@gmail.com">rarohde@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<div class="gmail_quote"><snip><br></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div>Also, it's worth noting that even if you have ironclad documentation that a legitimate license had been communicated, that only addresses that you were acting in good faith. Good faith actions eliminate the possibility for punitive damages, but if you rely on a license declaration that is incorrect (for example because the Flickr user stole it from someone else), you are still potentially liable for actual and/or statutory damages. Which is why professional publishers usually expect a clearer chain of authorship to avoid getting duped.</div>
<div> </div></blockquote>
<div class="gmail_quote"> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote">P.S. If found liable, you could subsequently sue the Flickr user to recover your losses, if you could find him... But that's more trouble and risk than I think most professionals would want.</div>
<div class="gmail_quote"> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote">-Robert Rohde</div>