On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 08:47:19 +0200, "SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy>
found these unused words floating about:

>J. A. Mc.  typed:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:28:41 +0200, "SleeperMan"
>> <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> found these unused words floating about:
>>
>>> SleeperMan  typed:
>>>
>>>> kreb  typed:
>>>>
>>>>> Keith said:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is photography.  If you find out where you got it I would want
>>>>> to seek permission to add it to my personal philosophical
>>>>> newsletter. I use a lot of photos, as a point getter, and to stop
>>>>> boredom.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It seems that my niece got it from her friend over chat... I'll ask
>>>> her to get him in touch and i'll let you know. It's a question,
>>>> though, if pic is his or he got it elsewhere... :-) I hope it's not
>>>> one of those stories: i got it from the one who got it from a guy,
>>>> who got it from another guy...etc---
>>>
>>> Sooo...
>>> It is one of those stories...
>>> her friend got it from Internet somewhere, so, i don't have a clue,
>>> who actually shot it or owe it. Sorry... but i guess you can use it,
>>> and write unknown author or similar below it.
>>>
>> NO ... you can't -legally- use it!
>>
>> Depending upon the level of protection and registration the imager
>> made for this, you could face serious fines IF caught ... it's up to
>> you to estimate the risk.
>
>It's strange though...i looked some pics of storm (found with google) and
>almost all have copyright or owner name on the pic. Too shame that this one
>haven't...
>
I understand, as I often posted to a binaries group. ALL of my images have a
copyright, usually small and fairly unobtrusive. I've pretty much stopped
posting since a few began vociferously complaining about 'defacing' the
image.

Many don't think to put copyrights ON their own websites ... !