"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
J C writes:

Are you talking about that photo of the girl with the burningly bright
eyes that appears in all their ads?

Yes.

Was that taken in Afghanistan?

Yes.

We're talking about the same Afghan girl,
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/afghangirl, right?

In which case, "No." According to NG, it was taken in the Nasir Bagh refugee
camp in Pakistan.

They finally found the girl (now a woman) recently and turned it
into a Major Media Event. The fact that they (presumably) never got a
release from her to begin with is never mentioned, even though her image
was used in some pretty commercial ways for decades.

Pro'lly because she was a refugee and not precisely situated to find out and
press her case? Then again, do the requirements about releases apply to
people there as much as they do to people in the U.S. or Europe? I don't
mean *should* they. I mean if they actually do, by law, considering how many
basic civil rights aren't observed in that part of the world as they are
here.

When the question of renumeration was raised, NG said she's being taken care
of now.

So if your talking about the photo that I
have in mind, its pretty old.

It has been quite a cash cow for National Geographic. Much more than
you'd expect for mere "editorial" usage.

Yes, with good reason. As many times as I've seen it, it still moves me.


--
~~Bluesea~~
Spam is great in musubi but not in email.
Please take out the trash before sending a direct reply.