On 1/28/07, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
All it takes is one lawsuit from someone who is upset at the images being used, and the money from the last fund drive could get used up in legal fees pretty durn fast. If someone object to images being used, then TAKE THEM OFF THE SITE, Fair use argments are not. I recall my interactions on en.wikipedia with people using copyrighted materials and some of the debates I had there.
Bottom line, these anonymus editors are not the people who will get nailed. The foundation will be the ones who get served and Brad will have to hire a law firm to defend the Foundation. It's pretty simple -- if someone who owns th images does not want them used, then do not use them.
There are a lot more torts than just copyright infringement they could pull out of the bag and use. They could claim unfari competition, tortious interference, and a whole host of other torts they may win with. It's cheaper, easier, and honorable to simply take down the images and tell the offended party it is being done as a courtesty. This makes it appear the foundation is acting in good faith.
This argument is pure copyright paranoia. What I mean by that is that Jeffrey is asserting as fact a hypothetical scenario ("The foundation will be the ones who get served and Brad will have to hire a law firm to defend the Foundation.") That's possible, but certainly not guaranteed.