AOL and Smart Money Advocate Copyright Infringement

[Jim Sykes]

Though some of you that do some school photography might be interested in this and possibly sending AOL a little feedback on how you feel about it.

http://money.aol.com/top5/general/most-obnoxious-school-costs-2

If you notice in the last part of the article, as a "money saving tip" it states:

"At the Clark School in Swampscott, Mass., parents can spend as little as $24 for a few wallet-size photos and one of the class. The bill rises to more than $50 if parents splurge for a package that includes a couple of 5-by-7s. Worried you won't have a spare to send to Grandma? Consider scanning your copy or email a cute digital shot you took yourself. "

With the last sentence being the real kicker.

I've emailed them through the link under the story and suggest anyone else that cares might want to do the same. Let them know how you feel.

[Dennis Murray]

I'd chalk this up more to ignorance than blatant copyright infringement.

How many high school kids have their school photo on their Myspace page? Or couples getting married have an engagement picture shot by a pro sent to the local newspaper without additional compensation to the pro?

I'm trying now to scan Myspace for high school sports photos I've taken this fall.

[John Thawley]

Dennis:

The only people guilty of ignorance is US if we don't respond to this type of thing. It is OUR responsiblity to raise the awareness of the casual attitude involved here. We need to educate... if not us, who will?

JT

[Jim Sykes]

But, a company such as AOL and Smart Money should know the laws surrounding this and its irresponsible to suggest it to someone in such a way.

You seem to think its ok becuase its done already, if companies such as this werent making it sound ok to the general public, then we wouldnt be fighting such a hard battle in the first place.

[Dennis Murray]

Ignorance of the law isn't a good excuse - I would suggest though this article, written by a journalist, is subject to the same ignorance the general population has.

The writer (http://www.smartmoney.com/pr/index.cfm?story=bradford) is a journalist, not a lawyer. Now the journalist should have done her job and checked facts - but it wouldn't be the first time a journalist got it wrong.

[John Thawley]

Dennis... no doubt, you're right. But what would the outrage be if he had suggested, "kids, if you go out to play and don't see your bike, just jump on the first bike you can find"?

We need to provide the outrage.

JT

[Daniel Buck]

I'd chalk this up more to ignorance than blatant copyright infringement.
yes, it is ignorance, and it needs to be made known that this is wrong.