----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Franklin" Subject: Re: WTF: Zoo license agreement?
> Anthony Farr wrote: > >> The way I read it [...] > > My general approach to legalese is to take /nothing/ for granted. :-) > >> assured that the zoo's advertising agency is not stalking you to get >> perpetually model-released and royalty free images to plaster up wherever >> they choose, no further consent needed. > > Oh, I wouldn't expect them to do that, simply because it isn't cost > effective. However, that verbiage clearly allows them to use your > likeness in their advertising, uncompensated, if you are visible in a > photo or video or audible in an audio recording that they make while > you're on their property. A very common thing. But the verbiage > doesn't restrict it to that, either, without some assumptions and > inferences. > My read has an even more Orwellian take, since they use both the words "image" and "likeness", it is arguable that they are two different things, with the consequence being that an image could be defined as an image created by the visitor. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
