On 2014-08-22 22:29:26 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article 2014082212495256301-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2014-08-22 19:36:53 +0000, sobriquet said:

On Friday, August 22, 2014 9:28:31 PM UTC+2, Savageduck wrote:
[..]
Just do the normal human thing. Lie about how the shutter got tripped.


Ah, you'd rather lie and make up the facts as you go along than
use your brain for a change and accept the inevitable conclusion
that copyright is bogus?

...but it is only thieves like you who believe that copyright is bogus.

if the image is truly in the public domain, then go ahead and use the image.

If there is work + an investment in time, labor, and production, from
which the creator of that image makes a living, and he advises the
World that he wants his rights of ownership respected by attaching a
copyright notice and his licensing conditions indicate a fee is
required to use it, and you don;t respect that licensing agreement, you
have stolen from that photographer.

Duck, you and the USPTO seem to be in disagreement on this point.

An over simplification on my part, not that it matters to the Dutch
parasite, known here as *Sobriquet*.

--
Regards,

Savageduck