On 10/10/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/10/2007, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/10/2007, David Gerard
<dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
http://searchengineland.com/071009-084922.php
This is not the dazzling polished work of wonder she wanted it to be,
as her hard disk went BANG on the weekend and she had to rewrite the
whole thing from scratch yesterday. I added ideas and some quotes.
I think the Richard Schiff vs Michele Merkin appproach might make the
point clear!
I seriously hate that FP. I hope it's not just soft porn stars that
pay attention. urg.
cheers,
Brianna
No we have hard core porn stars as well.
Looking at what we get through fromowner politicians seem to be a
group that are slightly more prepared than others to release pics.
Porn stars (with whom I have had a few encounters, in the "you deleted my
picture, put it back" sense), politicians, second-tier actors, and authors
(to a lesser degree) are eager to get their pictures up, especially if
there's a "No Free Image" placeholder up on their bio. Ugly "NO FREE
IMAGE"
grey thing = bad for publicity, while professional headshots = good for
publicity.
I think we need a special help page for portrait pictures that we can send
such people to, as they are generally rather unaware of copyrights. There
was a case on en.wp where a very famous author "released" a picture of
herself for her biography to replace the placeholder image, but after I
inquired as to who took and owns copyright to the photo she admitted it was
by another photographer who hadn't released the rights. People often don't
realise that just because a picture is OF them and they got hold of a copy,
the copyright still belongs to the photographer (unless another arrangement
was made), and the *subject* of the picture can't release the image under a
free license without permission.
--
Ayelie
~Editor at Large